Skip to main content
8.6: Chapter Review - Key Terms
-
-
Last updated
-
-
Save as PDF
-
Key Terms
-
access controls
-
ability to restrict or limit user groups to viewing specific pages within a website
-
algorithm
-
program used by a search engine to arrange pages in order from the most relevant to the least
-
backlink
-
link to another website that is related to your site and is designed to increase the rank of your site
-
blogging capability
-
feature that allows anyone in the company to add content in a thread of posts
-
calendaring
-
feature that allows you to plan content by scheduling future dates and times to release information
-
category
-
method of organizing posts on a website so that visitors can sort them easily
-
client side
-
everything that is displayed or occurs on the user’s end of a web application or device, such as text and image
-
content creation
-
development of original content for social media
-
content curation
-
process of gathering information on a topic and then sharing it on social media with added value
-
content editor
-
allows users to easily review the style and format of the content in a document, which provides optimal design and readability
-
content management lifecycle
-
process for managing content through the seven stages of organization, creation, storage, workflow, editing/versioning, publishing, and removal/archiving
-
content management system (CMS)
-
application that uses a set of processes to manage web content, allowing multiple contributors to collect, create, edit, and publish content
-
content syndication
-
allowing content on one site to be hosted on another site to reach a larger audience
-
crawling
-
process by which a search engine collects data from the internet
-
engagement
-
any interaction between two parties on social media platforms, such as sharing, linking, or commenting
-
engagement management (EM)
-
systematic approach that begins with the sales process and ends with engagement closing
-
enterprise content management
-
system that facilitates the life cycle of content within an organization by creating a timeline for content to be created, approved, and distributed
-
hashtag
-
word or keyword phrase preceded by a hash symbol (#); used to pull up and filter content
-
indexing
-
process by which search engines visit pages, analyze their content, and store the information in an index
-
keywords
-
specific words and phrases in your web content that make it easy for your site to populate within search engines
-
library
-
where content in CMS programs are organized and stored
-
long-tail keyword
-
extended key words that are more descriptive and provide more specific internet search results
-
mobile content management system (MCMS)
-
CMS that hosts a data store in a centralized location and allows content to be managed for multiple platforms
-
open-source CMS
-
CMS that is maintained by a community of developers and is open to the public
-
PageRank
-
algorithm used to help business owners promote online visibility by increasing the number of internet search results for a website
-
pages
-
framework that makes up a website
-
plug-in
-
extension or app that customizes and enhances the functionality of a website
-
post
-
piece of information that can be added to your website and listed in order from oldest to newest
-
proprietary CMS
-
CMS that is owned by the individual or group that created it and can be used only by those who purchase a license key
-
RSS (Really Simple Syndication)
-
method of delivering posts to a website
-
search engine optimization (SEO)
-
using keywords to help content on your site reach audiences
-
serving
-
process by which a search engine determines the best results based on user language, location, device, and queries
-
social media analytics
-
information gathered and measured to support business decisions
-
social media content management
-
process of creating, scheduling, publishing, and analyzing content for all your media platforms
-
tag
-
keyword for specific content on the site that can be used to organize information
-
Web 2.0
-
websites that provide two-way communication or interaction
-
web analytics
-
insights or data that can be evaluated against company objectives
-
web content management system (WCMS)
-
software content management system that offers website authoring, collaboration, and administration tools
-
web crawler software
-
computer software that scans the internet for certain words, tags, and links based on a particular search term
-
widget
-
tool that can be used to embed consistent information, such as advertising, on headers, footers, and sidebars within a website
-
Wordpress dashboard
-
main screen that allows you to see the administration of a website
-
WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get)
-
editing software that allows content to be displayed in the same format it will appear when printed or shown


3.7: Beowulf Sections 26-30
XXVI
BEOWULF spake, bairn of Ecgtheow: —
“Lo, we seafarers say our will,
far-come men, that we fain would seek
Hygelac now. We here have found
hosts to our heart: thou hast harbored us well.
If ever on earth I am able to win me
more of thy love, O lord of men,
aught anew, than I now have done,
for work of war I am willing still!
If it come to me ever across the seas
that neighbor foemen annoy and fright thee, —
as they that hate thee erewhile have used, —
thousands then of thanes I shall bring,
heroes to help thee. Of Hygelac I know,
ward of his folk, that, though few his years,
the lord of the Geats will give me aid
by word and by work, that well I may serve thee,
wielding the war-wood to win thy triumph
and lending thee might when thou lackest men.
If thy Hrethric should come to court of Geats,
a sovran’s son, he will surely there
find his friends. A far-off land
each man should visit who vaunts him brave.”
Him then answering, Hrothgar spake: —
“These words of thine the wisest God
sent to thy soul! No sager counsel
from so young in years e’er yet have I heard.
Thou art strong of main and in mind art wary,
art wise in words! I ween indeed
if ever it hap that Hrethel’s heir
by spear be seized, by sword-grim battle,
by illness or iron, thine elder and lord,
people’s leader, — and life be thine, —
no seemlier man will the Sea-Geats find
at all to choose for their chief and king,
for hoard-guard of heroes, if hold thou wilt
thy kinsman’s kingdom! Thy keen mind pleases me
the longer the better, Beowulf loved!
Thou hast brought it about that both our peoples,
sons of the Geat and Spear-Dane folk,
shall have mutual peace, and from murderous strife,
such as once they waged, from war refrain.
Long as I rule this realm so wide,
let our hoards be common, let heroes with gold
each other greet o’er the gannet’s-bath,
and the ringed-prow bear o’er rolling waves
tokens of love. I trow my landfolk
towards friend and foe are firmly joined,
and honor they keep in the olden way.”
To him in the hall, then, Healfdene’s son
gave treasures twelve, and the trust-of-earls
bade him fare with the gifts to his folk beloved,
hale to his home, and in haste return.
Then kissed the king of kin renowned,
Scyldings’ chieftain, that choicest thane,
and fell on his neck. Fast flowed the tears
of the hoary-headed. Heavy with winters,
he had chances twain, but he clung to this,
[1]
—
that each should look on the other again,
and hear him in hall. Was this hero so dear to him.
his breast’s wild billows he banned in vain;
safe in his soul a secret longing,
locked in his mind, for that loved man
burned in his blood. Then Beowulf strode,
glad of his gold-gifts, the grass-plot o’er,
warrior blithe. The wave-roamer bode
riding at anchor, its owner awaiting.
As they hastened onward, Hrothgar’s gift
they lauded at length. — ’Twas a lord unpeered,
every way blameless, till age had broken
— it spareth no mortal — his splendid might.
XXVII
CAME now to ocean the ever-courageous
hardy henchmen, their harness bearing,
woven war-sarks. The warden marked,
trusty as ever, the earl’s return.
From the height of the hill no hostile words
reached the guests as he rode to greet them;
but “Welcome!” he called to that Weder clan
as the sheen-mailed spoilers to ship marched on.
Then on the strand, with steeds and treasure
and armor their roomy and ring-dight ship
was heavily laden: high its mast
rose over Hrothgar’s hoarded gems.
A sword to the boat-guard Beowulf gave,
mounted with gold; on the mead-bench since
he was better esteemed, that blade possessing,
heirloom old. — Their ocean-keel boarding,
they drove through the deep, and Daneland left.
A sea-cloth was set, a sail with ropes,
firm to the mast; the flood-timbers moaned;
[2]
nor did wind over billows that wave-swimmer blow
across from her course. The craft sped on,
foam-necked it floated forth o’er the waves,
keel firm-bound over briny currents,
till they got them sight of the Geatish cliffs,
home-known headlands. High the boat,
stirred by winds, on the strand updrove.
Helpful at haven the harbor-guard stood,
who long already for loved companions
by the water had waited and watched afar.
He bound to the beach the broad-bosomed ship
with anchor-bands, lest ocean-billows
that trusty timber should tear away.
Then Beowulf bade them bear the treasure,
gold and jewels; no journey far
was it thence to go to the giver of rings,
Hygelac Hrethling: at home he dwelt
by the sea-wall close, himself and clan.
Haughty that house, a hero the king,
high the hall, and Hygd
[3]
right young,
wise and wary, though winters few
in those fortress walls she had found a home,
Haereth’s daughter. Nor humble her ways,
nor grudged she gifts to the Geatish men,
of precious treasure. Not Thryth’s pride showed she,
folk-queen famed, or that fell deceit.
Was none so daring that durst make bold
(save her lord alone) of the liegemen dear
that lady full in the face to look,
but forged fetters he found his lot,
bonds of death! And brief the respite;
soon as they seized him, his sword-doom was spoken,
and the burnished blade a baleful murder
proclaimed and closed. No queenly way
for woman to practise, though peerless she,
that the weaver-of-peace
[4]
from warrior dear
by wrath and lying his life should reave!
But Hemming’s kinsman hindered this. —
For over their ale men also told
that of these folk-horrors fewer she wrought,
onslaughts of evil, after she went,
gold-decked bride, to the brave young prince,
atheling haughty, and Offa’s hall
o’er the fallow flood at her father’s bidding
safely sought, where since she prospered,
royal, throned, rich in goods,
fain of the fair life fate had sent her,
and leal in love to the lord of warriors.
He, of all heroes I heard of ever
from sea to sea, of the sons of earth,
most excellent seemed. Hence Offa was praised
for his fighting and feeing by far-off men,
the spear-bold warrior; wisely he ruled
over his empire. Eomer woke to him,
help of heroes, Hemming’s kinsman,
Grandson of Garmund, grim in war.
XXVIII
HASTENED the hardy one, henchmen with him,
sandy strand of the sea to tread
and widespread ways. The world’s great candle,
sun shone from south. They strode along
with sturdy steps to the spot they knew
where the battle-king young, his burg within,
slayer of Ongentheow, shared the rings,
shelter-of-heroes. To Hygelac
Beowulf’s coming was quickly told, —
that there in the court the clansmen’s refuge,
the shield-companion sound and alive,
hale from the hero-play homeward strode.
With haste in the hall, by highest order,
room for the rovers was readily made.
By his sovran he sat, come safe from battle,
kinsman by kinsman. His kindly lord
he first had greeted in gracious form,
with manly words. The mead dispensing,
came through the high hall Haereth’s daughter,
winsome to warriors, wine-cup bore
to the hands of the heroes. Hygelac then
his comrade fairly with question plied
in the lofty hall, sore longing to know
what manner of sojourn the Sea-Geats made.
“What came of thy quest, my kinsman Beowulf,
when thy yearnings suddenly swept thee yonder
battle to seek o’er the briny sea,
combat in Heorot? Hrothgar couldst thou
aid at all, the honored chief,
in his wide-known woes? With waves of care
my sad heart seethed; I sore mistrusted
my loved one’s venture: long I begged thee
by no means to seek that slaughtering monster,
but suffer the South-Danes to settle their feud
themselves with Grendel. Now God be thanked
that safe and sound I can see thee now!”
Beowulf spake, the bairn of Ecgtheow: —
“’Tis known and unhidden, Hygelac Lord,
to many men, that meeting of ours,
struggle grim between Grendel and me,
which we fought on the field where full too many
sorrows he wrought for the Scylding-Victors,
evils unending. These all I avenged.
No boast can be from breed of Grendel,
any on earth, for that uproar at dawn,
from the longest-lived of the loathsome race
in fleshly fold! — But first I went
Hrothgar to greet in the hall of gifts,
where Healfdene’s kinsman high-renowned,
soon as my purpose was plain to him,
assigned me a seat by his son and heir.
The liegemen were lusty; my life-days never
such merry men over mead in hall
have I heard under heaven! The high-born queen,
people’s peace-bringer, passed through the hall,
cheered the young clansmen, clasps of gold,
ere she sought her seat, to sundry gave.
Oft to the heroes Hrothgar’s daughter,
to earls in turn, the ale-cup tendered, —
she whom I heard these hall-companions
Freawaru name, when fretted gold
she proffered the warriors. Promised is she,
gold-decked maid, to the glad son of Froda.
Sage this seems to the Scylding’s-friend,
kingdom’s-keeper: he counts it wise
the woman to wed so and ward off feud,
store of slaughter. But seldom ever
when men are slain, does the murder-spear sink
but briefest while, though the bride be fair!
[5]
“Nor haply will like it the Heathobard lord,
and as little each of his liegemen all,
when a thane of the Danes, in that doughty throng,
goes with the lady along their hall,
and on him the old-time heirlooms glisten
hard and ring-decked, Heathobard’s treasure,
weapons that once they wielded fair
until they lost at the linden-play
[6]
liegeman leal and their lives as well.
Then, over the ale, on this heirloom gazing,
some ash-wielder old who has all in mind
that spear-death of men,
[7]
— he is stern of mood,
heavy at heart, — in the hero young
tests the temper and tries the soul
and war-hate wakens, with words like these: —
Canst thou not, comrade, ken that sword
which to the fray thy father carried
in his final feud, ’neath the fighting-mask,
dearest of blades, when the Danish slew him
and wielded the war-place on Withergild’s fall,
after havoc of heroes, those hardy Scyldings?

Thus he urges and eggs him all the time
with keenest words, till occasion offers
that Freawaru’s thane, for his father’s deed,
after bite of brand in his blood must slumber,
losing his life; but that liegeman flies
living away, for the land he kens.
And thus be broken on both their sides
oaths of the earls, when Ingeld’s breast
wells with war-hate, and wife-love now
after the care-billows cooler grows.
“So
[9]
I hold not high the Heathobards’ faith
due to the Danes, or their during love
and pact of peace. — But I pass from that,
turning to Grendel, O giver-of-treasure,
and saying in full how the fight resulted,
hand-fray of heroes. When heaven’s jewel
had fled o’er far fields, that fierce sprite came,
night-foe savage, to seek us out
where safe and sound we sentried the hall.
To Hondscio then was that harassing deadly,
his fall there was fated. He first was slain,
girded warrior. Grendel on him
turned murderous mouth, on our mighty kinsman,
and all of the brave man’s body devoured.
Yet none the earlier, empty-handed,
would the bloody-toothed murderer, mindful of bale,
outward go from the gold-decked hall:
but me he attacked in his terror of might,
with greedy hand grasped me. A glove hung by him
[10]
wide and wondrous, wound with bands;
and in artful wise it all was wrought,
by devilish craft, of dragon-skins.
Me therein, an innocent man,
the fiendish foe was fain to thrust
with many another. He might not so,
when I all angrily upright stood.
’Twere long to relate how that land-destroyer
I paid in kind for his cruel deeds;
yet there, my prince, this people of thine
got fame by my fighting. He fled away,
and a little space his life preserved;
but there staid behind him his stronger hand
left in Heorot; heartsick thence
on the floor of the ocean that outcast fell.
Me for this struggle the Scyldings’-friend
paid in plenty with plates of gold,
with many a treasure, when morn had come
and we all at the banquet-board sat down.
Then was song and glee. The gray-haired Scylding,
much tested, told of the times of yore.
Whiles the hero his harp bestirred,
wood-of-delight; now lays he chanted
of sooth and sadness, or said aright
legends of wonder, the wide-hearted king;
or for years of his youth he would yearn at times,
for strength of old struggles, now stricken with age,
hoary hero: his heart surged full
when, wise with winters, he wailed their flight.
Thus in the hall the whole of that day
at ease we feasted, till fell o’er earth
another night. Anon full ready
in greed of vengeance, Grendel’s mother
set forth all doleful. Dead was her son
through war-hate of Weders; now, woman monstrous
with fury fell a foeman she slew,
avenged her offspring. From Aeschere old,
loyal councillor, life was gone;
nor might they e’en, when morning broke,
those Danish people, their death-done comrade
burn with brands, on balefire lay
the man they mourned. Under mountain stream
she had carried the corpse with cruel hands.
For Hrothgar that was the heaviest sorrow
of all that had laden the lord of his folk.
The leader then, by thy life, besought me
(sad was his soul) in the sea-waves’ coil
to play the hero and hazard my being
for glory of prowess: my guerdon he pledged.
I then in the waters — ’tis widely known —
that sea-floor-guardian savage found.
Hand-to-hand there a while we struggled;
billows welled blood; in the briny hall
her head I hewed with a hardy blade
from Grendel’s mother, — and gained my life,
though not without danger. My doom was not yet.
Then the haven-of-heroes, Healfdene’s son,
gave me in guerdon great gifts of price.
XXIX
“So held this king to the customs old,
that I wanted for nought in the wage I gained,
the meed of my might; he made me gifts,
Healfdene’s heir, for my own disposal.
Now to thee, my prince, I proffer them all,
gladly give them. Thy grace alone
can find me favor. Few indeed
have I of kinsmen, save, Hygelac, thee!”
Then he bade them bear him the boar-head standard,
the battle-helm high, and breastplate gray,
the splendid sword; then spake in form: —
“Me this war-gear the wise old prince,
Hrothgar, gave, and his hest he added,
that its story be straightway said to thee. —
A while it was held by Heorogar king,
for long time lord of the land of Scyldings;
yet not to his son the sovran left it,
to daring Heoroweard, — dear as he was to him,
his harness of battle. — Well hold thou it all!”
And I heard that soon passed o’er the path of this treasure,
all apple-fallow, four good steeds,
each like the others, arms and horses
he gave to the king. So should kinsmen be,
not weave one another the net of wiles,
or with deep-hid treachery death contrive
for neighbor and comrade. His nephew was ever
by hardy Hygelac held full dear,
and each kept watch o’er the other’s weal.
I heard, too, the necklace to Hygd he presented,
wonder-wrought treasure, which Wealhtheow gave him
sovran’s daughter: three steeds he added,
slender and saddle-gay. Since such gift
the gem gleamed bright on the breast of the queen.
Thus showed his strain the son of Ecgtheow
as a man remarked for mighty deeds
and acts of honor. At ale he slew not
comrade or kin; nor cruel his mood,
though of sons of earth his strength was greatest,
a glorious gift that God had sent
the splendid leader. Long was he spurned,
and worthless by Geatish warriors held;
him at mead the master-of-clans
failed full oft to favor at all.
Slack and shiftless the strong men deemed him,
profitless prince; but payment came,
to the warrior honored, for all his woes. —
Then the bulwark-of-earls
[11]
bade bring within,
hardy chieftain, Hrethel’s heirloom
garnished with gold: no Geat e’er knew
in shape of a sword a statelier prize.
The brand he laid in Beowulf’s lap;
and of hides assigned him seven thousand,
[12]
with house and high-seat. They held in common
land alike by their line of birth,
inheritance, home: but higher the king
because of his rule o’er the realm itself.
Now further it fell with the flight of years,
with harryings horrid, that Hygelac perished,
[13]
and Heardred, too, by hewing of swords
under the shield-wall slaughtered lay,
when him at the van of his victor-folk
sought hardy heroes, Heatho-Scilfings,
in arms o’erwhelming Hereric’s nephew.
Then Beowulf came as king this broad
realm to wield; and he ruled it well
fifty winters,
[14]
a wise old prince,
warding his land, until One began
in the dark of night, a Dragon, to rage.
In the grave on the hill a hoard it guarded,
in the stone-barrow steep. A strait path reached it,
unknown to mortals. Some man, however,
came by chance that cave within
to the heathen hoard.
[15]
In hand he took
a golden goblet, nor gave he it back,
stole with it away, while the watcher slept,
by thievish wiles: for the warden’s wrath
prince and people must pay betimes!
XXX
THAT way he went with no will of his own,
in danger of life, to the dragon’s hoard,
but for pressure of peril, some prince’s thane.
He fled in fear the fatal scourge,
seeking shelter, a sinful man,
and entered in. At the awful sight
tottered that guest, and terror seized him;
yet the wretched fugitive rallied anon
from fright and fear ere he fled away,
and took the cup from that treasure-hoard.
Of such besides there was store enough,
heirlooms old, the earth below,
which some earl forgotten, in ancient years,
left the last of his lofty race,
heedfully there had hidden away,
dearest treasure. For death of yore
had hurried all hence; and he alone
left to live, the last of the clan,
weeping his friends, yet wished to bide
warding the treasure, his one delight,
though brief his respite. The barrow, new-ready,
to strand and sea-waves stood anear,
hard by the headland, hidden and closed;
there laid within it his lordly heirlooms
and heaped hoard of heavy gold
that warden of rings. Few words he spake:
“Now hold thou, earth, since heroes may not,
what earls have owned! Lo, erst from thee
brave men brought it!
None have I left to lift the sword,
or to cleanse the carven cup of price,
beaker bright. My brave are gone.
And the helmet hard, all haughty with gold,
shall part from its plating. Polishers sleep
who could brighten and burnish the battle-mask;
and those weeds of war that were wont to brave
over bicker of shields the bite of steel
rust with their bearer. The ringed mail
fares not far with famous chieftain,
at side of hero! No harp’s delight,
no glee-wood’s gladness! No good hawk now
flies through the hall! Nor horses fleet
stamp in the burgstead! Battle and death
the flower of my race have reft away.”
Mournful of mood, thus he moaned his woe,
alone, for them all, and unblithe wept
by day and by night, till death’s fell wave
o’erwhelmed his heart. His hoard-of-bliss
that old ill-doer open found,
who, blazing at twilight the barrows haunteth,
naked foe-dragon flying by night
folded in fire: the folk of earth
dread him sore. ’Tis his doom to seek
hoard in the graves, and heathen gold
to watch, many-wintered: nor wins he thereby!
Powerful this plague-of-the-people thus
held the house of the hoard in earth
three hundred winters; till One aroused
wrath in his breast, to the ruler bearing
that costly cup, and the king implored
for bond of peace. So the barrow was plundered,
borne off was booty. His boon was granted
that wretched man; and his ruler saw
first time what was fashioned in far-off days.
When the dragon awoke, new woe was kindled.
O’er the stone he snuffed. The stark-heart found
footprint of foe who so far had gone
in his hidden craft by the creature’s head. —
So may the undoomed easily flee
evils and exile, if only he gain
the grace of The Wielder! — That warden of gold
o’er the ground went seeking, greedy to find
the man who wrought him such wrong in sleep.
Savage and burning, the barrow he circled
all without; nor was any there,
none in the waste…. Yet war he desired,
was eager for battle. The barrow he entered,
sought the cup, and discovered soon
that some one of mortals had searched his treasure,
his lordly gold. The guardian waited
ill-enduring till evening came;
boiling with wrath was the barrow’s keeper,
and fain with flame the foe to pay
for the dear cup’s loss. — Now day was fled
as the worm had wished. By its wall no more
was it glad to bide, but burning flew
folded in flame: a fearful beginning
for sons of the soil; and soon it came,
in the doom of their lord, to a dreadful end.
-
That is, he might or might not see Beowulf again. Old as he was, the latter chance was likely; but he clung to the former, hoping to see his young friend again “and exchange brave words in the hall.”
↵
-
With the speed of the boat.
↵
-
Queen to Hygelac. She is praised by contrast with the antitype, Thryth, just as Beowulf was praised by contrast with Heremod.
↵
-
Kenning for “wife.”
↵
-
Beowulf gives his uncle the king not mere gossip of his journey, but a statesmanlike forecast of the outcome of certain policies at the Danish court. Talk of interpolation here is absurd. As both Beowulf and Hygelac know, -- and the folk for whom the Beowulf was put together also knew, -- Froda was king of the Heathobards (probably the Langobards, once near neighbors of Angle and Saxon tribes on the continent), and had fallen in fight with the Danes. Hrothgar will set aside this feud by giving his daughter as “peace-weaver” and wife to the young king Ingeld, son of the slain Froda. But Beowulf, on general principles and from his observation of the particular case, foretells trouble. Note:
↵
-
Play of shields, battle. A Danish warrior cuts down Froda in the fight, and takes his sword and armor, leaving them to a son. This son is selected to accompany his mistress, the young princess Freawaru, to her new home when she is Ingeld’s queen. Heedlessly he wears the sword of Froda in hall. An old warrior points it out to Ingeld, and eggs him on to vengeance. At his instigation the Dane is killed; but the murderer, afraid of results, and knowing the land, escapes. So the old feud must break out again.
↵
-
That is, their disastrous battle and the slaying of their king.
↵
-
The sword.
↵
-
Beowulf returns to his forecast. Things might well go somewhat as follows, he says; sketches a little tragic story; and with this prophecy by illustration returns to the tale of his adventure.
↵
-
Not an actual glove, but a sort of bag.
↵
-
Hygelac.
↵
-
This is generally assumed to mean hides, though the text simply says “seven thousand.” A hide in England meant about 120 acres, though “the size of the acre varied.”
↵
-
On the historical raid into Frankish territory between 512 and 520 A.D. The subsequent course of events, as gathered from hints of this epic, is partly told in Scandinavian legend.
↵
-
The chronology of this epic, as scholars have worked it out, would make Beowulf well over ninety years of age when he fights the dragon. But the fifty years of his reign need not be taken as historical fact.
↵
-
The text is here hopelessly illegible, and only the general drift of the meaning can be rescued. For one thing, we have the old myth of a dragon who guards hidden treasure. But with this runs the story of some noble, last of his race, who hides all his wealth within this barrow and there chants his farewell to life’s glories. After his death the dragon takes possession of the hoard and watches over it. A condemned or banished man, desperate, hides in the barrow, discovers the treasure, and while the dragon sleeps, makes off with a golden beaker or the like, and carries it for propitiation to his master. The dragon discovers the loss and exacts fearful penalty from the people round about.
↵
- Beowulf. Authored by : Trans. Gummere. Provided by : Project Gutenberg. Located at : http://www.gutenberg.org/files/981/981-h/981-h.htm#linkfootnote2b . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright


11.2E: Systems of Linear Equations with Three Variables (Exercises)
For the following exercises, solve the system of three equations using substitution or addition.
11.
\(0.5 x-0.5 y=10\)
\(-0.2 y+0.2 x=4\)
\(0.1 x+0.1 z=2\)
12.
\(5 x+3 y-z=5\)
\(3 x-2 y+4 z=13\)
\(4 x+3 y+5 z=22\)
13.
\(x+y+z=1\)
\(2 x+2 y+2 z=1\)
\(3 x+3 y=2\)
14.
\(2 x-3 y+z=-1\)
\(x+y+z=-4\)
\(4 x+2 y-3 z=33\)
15.
\(3 x+2 y-z=-10\)
\(x-y+2 z=7\)
\(-x+3 y+z=-2\)
16.
\(3 x+4 z=-11\)
\( x-2 y=5\)
\(4 y-z=-10\)
17.
\(2 x-3 y+z=0\)
\(2 x+4 y-3 z=0 \)
\(6 x-2 y-z=0 \)
18.
\(6 x-4 y-2 z=2 \)
\(3 x+2 y-5 z=4 \)
\(6 y-7 z=5\)
For the following exercises, write a system of equations to solve each problem. Solve the system of equations.
19. Three odd numbers sum up to 61 . The smaller is one-third the larger and the middle number is 16 less than the larger. What are the three numbers?
20. A local theatre sells out for their show. They sell all 500 tickets for a total purse of \(\$ 8,070.00 .\) The tickets were priced at \(\$ 15\) for students, \(\$ 12\) for children, and \(\$ 18\) for adults. If the band sold three times as many adult tickets as children's tickets, how many of each type was sold?


5.4: Sexual Anatomy
-
- Last updated
- Save as PDF
To understand our own bodies and also understand enough about sexuality to teach our children, we must understand the basics of female and male anatomy. Figure 3 shows an artist’s depiction of a cross section of female reproductive and sexual anatomy. The clitoris is extremely sensitive and is protected by the clitoral hood (not shown here). It sits above the vagina. In females, urine exits the body at the external urethral orifice (also called meatus). The vaginal orifice simply means the opening to the vagina itself. The labia are in two places, closer to the vaginal orifice (labia minora) and further away from the vaginal orifice (labia majora).
The urinary bladder sits behind the pubic bone and during urination travels an inch or two out of the body via the external urethral orifice. In the back and top of the vagina sits the cervix. The cervix is simply the window into the uterus. It is round, muscular and thick and has a small opening in it. The cervix is the bottom portion of the uterus (the uterus is where a fetus or baby would grow and develop during pregnancy).
Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\). Diagram of a Woman’s reproductive Organs
The uterus leans forward toward the pubic bone. Inside the uterus on the left and the right sides are two small openings where the fallopian tube connects the ovaries to the uterus. There are two ovaries that have thousands of eggs in them at birth. A woman may release as many as 450 eggs during her reproductive years. After an egg is released from the ovary (ovulation), the fallopian tube carries the egg from the ovary down to the uterus. When pregnancy occurs it is often because sperm met the egg in the fallopian tube and fertilized it. Later, if the fertilized egg travels down the fallopian tube and implants into the uterus, then conception has taken place.
The vagina is approximately three inches long and is made of tissues that are epithelial and mucosal. This means that when blood flow increases to the pelvis the vagina produces a lubricant in the form of moisture. The vagina is not hollow in the sense that a tube is round and hollow. The vagina is relatively flat and has potential space rather than constantly open space. The vagina has a band of pelvic floor muscles that surround it. One set of muscles is called the puboccocceygeus muscle (PC muscle) which is located approximately 1 inch inside the vagina and which also plays a role in sexual pleasure for both partners.


11.10: Neurological Assessment
Now that we have reviewed tests included in a neurological exam, let’s review components of a routine neurological assessment typically performed by registered nurses. The neurological assessment begins by collecting subjective data followed by a physical examination.
Subjective Assessment
Subjective data collection guides the focus of the physical examination. Collect data from the patient using effective communication and pay particular attention to what the patient is reporting, including current symptoms and any history of neurological illness. Ask follow-up questions related to symptoms such as confusion, headache, vertigo, seizures, recent injury or fall, weakness, numbness, tingling, difficulty swallowing (called dysphagia ) or speaking (called dysphasia ), or lack of coordination of body movements. [1]
See Table \(\PageIndex{1}\) for sample interview questions to use during the subjective assessment
| Interview Questions | Follow-up |
|---|---|
|
Are you experiencing any current neurological concerns such as headache, dizziness, weakness, numbness, tingling, tremors, loss of balance, or decreased coordination?
Have you experienced any difficulty swallowing or speaking? Have you experienced any recent falls? |
If the patient is seeking care for an acute neurological problem, use the OLD CART & ICE method to further evaluate their chief complaint. The OLD CART & ICE method is described in the “Health History” chapter.
Note: If critical findings of an acute neurological event are actively occurring, such as signs of a stroke, obtain emergency assistance according to agency policy. |
| Have you ever experienced a neurological condition such as a stroke, transient ischemic attack, seizures, or head injury? | Describe the condition(s), date(s), and treatment(s). |
| Are you currently taking any medications, herbs, or supplements for a neurological condition? | Please describe. |
Life Span Considerations
Newborn
At birth, the neurologic system is not fully developed. The brain is still developing, and the newborn’s anterior fontanelle doesn’t close until approximately 18 months of age. The sensory and motor systems gradually develop in the first year of life. The newborn’s sensory system responds to stimuli by crying or moving body parts. Initial motor activity is primitive in the form of newborn reflexes. Additional information about newborn reflexes is provided in the “Assessing Reflexes” section. As the newborn develops, so do the motor and sensory integration. Specific questions to ask parents or caregivers of infants include the following:
- Have you noticed your infant sleeping excessively or having difficulty arousing?
- Has your infant had difficulty feeding, sucking, or swallowing?
Children
Depending on the child’s age and developmental level, they may answer questions independently or the child’s parent/guardian may provide information.
- Do you experience headaches? If so, how often?
- Have you had a seizure or convulsion?

Older Adults
The aging adult experiences a general slowing in nerve conduction, resulting in a slowed motor and sensory interaction. Fine coordination, balance, and reflex activity may be impaired. There may also be a gradual decrease in cerebral blood flow and oxygen use that can cause dizziness and loss of balance. Examples of specific subjective questions for the older adult include the following:
- Have you ever had a head injury or recent fall?
- Do you experience any shaking or tremors of your hands? If so, do they occur more with rest or activity?
- Have you had any weakness, numbness, or tingling in any of your extremities?
- Have you noticed a problem with balance or coordination?
- Do you ever feel lightheaded or dizzy? If so, does it occur with activity or change in position?
Objective Assessment
The physical examination of the neurological system includes assessment of both the central and peripheral nervous systems. A routine neurological exam usually starts by assessing the patient’s mental status followed by evaluation of sensory function and motor function. Comprehensive neurological exams may further evaluate cranial nerve function and deep tendon reflexes. The nurse must be knowledgeable of what is normal or expected for the patient’s age, development, and condition to analyze the meaning of the data that is being collected.
Inspection
Nurses begin assessing a patient’s overall neurological status by observing their general appearance, posture, ability to walk, and personal hygiene in the first few minutes of nurse-patient interaction. For additional information about obtaining an overall impression of a patient’s status while performing an assessment, see the “ General Survey ” chapter.
Level of orientation is assessed and other standardized tools to evaluate a patient’s mental status may be used, such as the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), NIH Stroke Scale, or Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE). Read more information about these tools under the “Assessing Mental Status” section earlier in this chapter.
The nurse also assesses a patient’s cerebellar function by observing their gait and balance. See the “Assessing Cerebellar Function” section earlier in chapter for more information.
Auscultation
Auscultation refers to the action of listening to sounds from the heart, lungs, or other organs with a stethoscope as a part of physical examination. Auscultation is not typically performed by registered nurses during a routine neurological assessment. However, advanced practice nurses and other health care providers may auscultate the carotid arteries for the presence of a swishing sound called a bruit . Bruits suggest interference with cerebral blood flow that can cause neurological deficits.
Palpation
Palpation during a physical examination typically refers to the use of touch to evaluate organs for size, location, or tenderness, but palpation during the neurologic physical exam involves using touch to assess sensory function and motor function. Refer to sections on “Assessing Sensory Function,” “Assessing Motor Function,” “Assessing Cranial Nerves,” and “Assessing Reflexes” earlier in this chapter for additional information on how to perform these tests.
See Table \(\PageIndex{2}\) for a summary of expected and unexpected findings when performing an adult neurological assessment.
| Assessment | Expected Findings | Unexpected Findings (Document and notify provider if new finding*) |
|---|---|---|
| Inspection | Alert and oriented to person, place, and time | |
| Critical findings to report immediately and/or obtain emergency assistance: | Change in mental status, pupil responsiveness, facial drooping, slurred words or inability to speak, or sudden unilateral loss of motor strength |
- This work is a derivative of Clinical Procedures for Safer Patient Care by British Columbia Institute of Technology licensed under CC BY 4.0 ↵


19.3: Comparing Real and Nominal GDP
-
- Last updated
- Save as PDF
- Boundless
- Boundless
Calculating Real GDP
Real GDP growth is the value of all goods produced in a given year; nominal GDP is value of all the goods taking price changes into account.
learning objectives
- Calculate real and nominal GDP growth
Gross Domestic Product
The Gross domestic Product (GDP) is the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time. The GDP is the officially recognized totals. The following equation is used to calculate the GDP:
\[\mathrm{GDP=C+I+G+(X−M)}\]
Written out, the equation for calculating GDP is:
\[\text{GDP} = private consumption + gross investment + government investment + government spending + (exports – imports).
For the gross domestic product, “gross” means that the GDP measures production regardless of the various uses to which the product can be put. Production can be used for immediate consumption, for investment into fixed assets or inventories, or for replacing fixed assets that have depreciated. “Domestic” means that the measurement of GDP contains only products from within its borders.
Nominal GDP
The nominal GDP is the value of all the final goods and services that an economy produced during a given year. It is calculated by using the prices that are current in the year in which the output is produced. In economics, a nominal value is expressed in monetary terms. For example, a nominal value can change due to shifts in quantity and price. The nominal GDP takes into account all of the changes that occurred for all goods and services produced during a given year. If prices change from one period to the next and the output does not change, the nominal GDP would change even though the output remained constant.
Nominal GDP : This image shows the nominal GDP for a given year in the United States.
Real GDP
The real GDP is the total value of all of the final goods and services that an economy produces during a given year, accounting for inflation. It is calculated using the prices of a selected base year. To calculate Real GDP, you must determine how much GDP has been changed by inflation since the base year, and divide out the inflation each year. Real GDP, therefore, accounts for the fact that if prices change but output doesn’t, nominal GDP would change.
Real GDP Growth : This graph shows the real GDP growth over a specific period of time.
In economics, real value is not influenced by changes in price, it is only impacted by changes in quantity. Real values measure the purchasing power net of any price changes over time. The real GDP determines the purchasing power net of price changes for a given year. Real GDP accounts for inflation and deflation. It transforms the money-value measure, nominal GDP, into an index for quantity of total output.
The GDP Deflator
The GDP deflator is a price index that measures inflation or deflation in an economy by calculating a ratio of nominal GDP to real GDP.
learning objectives
- Calculate real and nominal GDP growth
The GDP deflator (implicit price deflator for GDP) is a measure of the level of prices of all new, domestically produced, final goods and services in an economy. It is a price index that measures price inflation or deflation, and is calculated using nominal GDP and real GDP.
Nominal GDP versus Real GDP
Nominal GDP, or unadjusted GDP, is the market value of all final goods produced in a geographical region, usually a country. That market value depends on the quantities of goods and services produced and their respective prices. Therefore, if prices change from one period to the next but actual output does not, nominal GDP would also change even though output remained constant.
In contrast, real gross domestic product accounts for price changes that may have occurred due to inflation. In other words, real GDP is nominal GDP adjusted for inflation. If prices change from one period to the next but actual output does not, real GDP would be remain the same. Real GDP reflects changes in real production. If there is no inflation or deflation, nominal GDP will be the same as real GDP.
Calculating the GDP Deflator
The GDP deflator is calculated by dividing nominal GDP by real GDP and multiplying by 100.
GDP Deflator Equation : The GDP deflator measures price inflation in an economy. It is calculated by dividing nominal GDP by real GDP and multiplying by 100.
Consider a numeric example: if nominal GDP is $100,000, and real GDP is $45,000, then the GDP deflator will be 222 (GDP deflator = $100,000/$45,000 * 100 = 222.22).
In the U.S., GDP and GDP deflator are calculated by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Relationship between GDP Deflator and CPI
Like the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the GDP deflator is a measure of price inflation/deflation with respect to a specific base year. Similar to the CPI, the GDP deflator of the base year itself is equal to 100. Unlike the CPI, the GDP deflator is not based on a fixed basket of goods and services; the “basket” for the GDP deflator is allowed to change from year to year with people’s consumption and investment patterns. However, trends in the GDP deflator will be similar to trends in the CPI.
Key Points
- The following equation is used to calculate the GDP: \(\mathrm{GDP = C + I + G + (X – M)}\) or GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government investment + government spending + (exports – imports).
- Nominal value changes due to shifts in quantity and price.
- In economics, real value is not influenced by changes in price, it is only impacted by changes in quantity. Real values measure the purchasing power net of any price changes over time.
- Real GDP accounts for inflation and deflation. It transforms the money-value measure, nominal GDP, into an index for quantity of total output.
- The GDP deflator is a measure of price inflation. It is calculated by dividing Nominal GDP by Real GDP and then multiplying by 100. (Based on the formula).
- Nominal GDP is the market value of goods and services produced in an economy, unadjusted for inflation. Real GDP is nominal GDP, adjusted for inflation to reflect changes in real output.
- Trends in the GDP deflator are similar to changes in the Consumer Price Index, which is a different way of measuring inflation.
Key Terms
- nominal : Without adjustment to remove the effects of inflation (in contrast to real).
- gross domestic product : Known also as GDP, this is a measure of the economic production of a particular territory in financial capital terms over a specific time period.
- GDP deflator : A measure of the level of prices of all new, domestically produced, final goods and services in an economy. It is calculated by computing the ratio of nominal GDP to the real measure of GDP.
- real GDP : A macroeconomic measure of the value of the economy’s output adjusted for price changes (inflation or deflation).
- nominal GDP : A macroeconomic measure of the value of the economy’s output that is not adjusted for inflation.
LICENSES AND ATTRIBUTIONS
CC LICENSED CONTENT, SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTION
- gross domestic product. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gross_domestic_product . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Nominal GDP. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal...stments_to_GDP . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Real GDP. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_GDP . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Real versus nominal value (economics). Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ve...ue_(economics) . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Macroeconomics/Glossary. Provided by : Wikibooks. Located at : en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Macroec...s/Glossary%23N . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- GDP. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- nominal. Provided by : Wiktionary. Located at : en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nominal . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Us real gdp growth. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...gdp_growth.gif . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- USA states nominal gdp. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...ominal_gdp.PNG . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Real gross domestic product. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_gr...mestic_product . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- GDP deflator. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP_deflator . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Nominal GDP. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal...stments_to_GDP . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- nominal gdp. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/nominal%20gdp . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- real GDP. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/real%20GDP . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- GDP deflator. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP%20deflator . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- Us real gdp growth. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...gdp_growth.gif . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- USA states nominal gdp. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...ominal_gdp.PNG . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
- GDP deflator. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP_deflator . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright


5.9: Ingroup Favoritism and Prejudice
-
- Last updated
- Save as PDF
- Anonymous
- LibreTexts
Learning Objectives
- Review the causes and outcomes of ingroup favoritism.
- Summarize the results of Henri Tajfel’s research on minimal groups.
- Outline the personality and cultural variables that influence ingroup favoritism.
We have now seen that social categorization occurs whenever we think about others in terms of their category memberships rather than on the basis of other, more personal information about the individual. And we have seen that social categorization can have a variety of negative consequences for the people who are the targets of our stereotypes. But social categorization becomes even more important, and has even more powerful effects upon our reactions to others, when the categorization becomes more emotionally involving, and particularly when the categorization involves categorization into liked ingroups and potentially disliked outgroups (Amodio & Devine, 2006).
Because our ancestors lived in small social groups that were frequently in conflict with other groups, it was evolutionarily functional for them to view members of other groups as different and potentially dangerous (Brewer & Caporael, 2006; Navarrete, Kurzban, Fessler, & Kirkpatrick, 2004). Differentiating between “us” and “them” probably helped keep us safe and free from disease, and as a result, the human brain became very efficient in making these distinctions (Mahajan et al., 2011; Phelps et al., 2000; Van Vugt & Schaller, 2008; Zaraté, Stoever, MacLin, & Arms-Chavez, 2008). The problem is that these naturally occurring tendencies may lead us to prefer people who are like us, and in some cases even to unfairly reject people from outgroups.
Liking “Us” More Than “Them”: Ingroup Favoritism
In his important research on group perceptions, Henri Tajfel and his colleagues (Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, & Flament, 1971) demonstrated how incredibly powerful the role of self-concern is in group perceptions. He found that just dividing people into arbitrary groups produces ingroup favoritism— the tendency to respond more positively to people from our ingroups than we do to people from outgroups .
In Tajfel’s research, small groups of high school students came to his laboratory for a study supposedly concerning “artistic tastes.” The students were first shown a series of paintings by two contemporary artists, Paul Klee and Wassily Kandinsky. Supposedly on the basis of their preferences for each painting, the students were divided into two groups (they were called the X group and the Y group). Each boy was told which group he had been assigned to and that different boys were assigned to different groups. But none of them were told the group memberships of any of the other boys.
The boys were then given a chance to allocate points to other boys in their own group and to boys in the other group (but never to themselves) using a series of payoff matrices, such as those shown in Figure 12.7. The charts divided a given number of rewards between two boys, and the boys thought that the rewards would be used to determine how much each boy would be paid for his participation. In some cases, the division was between two boys in the boy’s own group (the ingroup); in other cases, the division was between two boys who had been assigned to the other group (the outgroup); and in still other cases, the division was between a boy in the ingroup and a boy in the outgroup. Tajfel then examined the goals that the boys used when they divided up the points.
A comparison of the boys’ choices in the different matrices showed that they allocated points between two boys in the ingroup or between two boys in the outgroup in an essentially fair way, so that each boy got the same amount. However, fairness was not the predominant approach when dividing points between ingroup and outgroup. In this case, rather than exhibiting fairness, the boys displayed ingroup favoritism, such that they gave more points to other members of their own group in relationship to boys in the other group. For instance, the boys might assign 8 points to the ingroup boy and only 3 points to the outgroup boy, even though the matrix also contained a choice in which they could give the ingroup and the outgroup boys 13 points each. In short, the boys preferred to maximize the gains of the other boys in their own group in comparison with the boys in the outgroup, even if doing so meant giving their own group members fewer points than they could otherwise have received.
Perhaps the most striking part of Tajfel’s results is that ingroup favoritism was found to occur on the basis of such arbitrary and unimportant groupings. In fact, ingroup favoritism occurs even when the assignment to groups is on such trivial things as whether people “overestimate” or “underestimate” the number of dots shown on a display, or on the basis of a completely random coin toss (Billig & Tajfel, 1973; Locksley, Ortiz, & Hepburn, 1980). Tajfel’s research, as well other research demonstrating ingroup favoritism, provides a powerful demonstration of a very important social psychological process: Groups exist simply because individuals perceive those groups as existing. Even in a case where there really is no group (at least no meaningful group in any real sense), we still perceive groups and still demonstrate ingroup favoritism.
The Outcomes of Ingroup Favoritism
The tendency to favor their ingroup develops quickly in young children, beginning at the age of 3 years and increasing up to about 6 years of age, and almost immediately begins to influence their behavior (Aboud, 2003; Aboud & Amato, 2001). Young children show greater liking for peers of their own sex and race and typically play with same-sex others after the age of 3. And there is a norm that we should favor our ingroups: People like people who express ingroup favoritism better than those who are more egalitarian (Castelli & Carraro, 2010). Ingroup favoritism is found for many different types of social groups, in many different settings, on many different dimensions, and in many different cultures (Bennett et al., 2004; Pinter & Greenwald, 2011). Ingroup favoritism also occurs on trait ratings, such that ingroup members are rated as having more positive characteristics than are outgroup members (Hewstone, 1990). People also take credit for the successes of other ingroup members, remember more positive than negative information about ingroups, are more critical of the performance of outgroup than of ingroup members, and believe that their own groups are less prejudiced than are outgroups (Shelton & Richeson, 2005).
People also talk differently about their ingroups than their outgroups, such that they describe the ingroup and its members as having broad positive traits (“We are generous and friendly” ) but describe negative ingroup behaviors in terms of the specific behaviors of single group members (“Our group member, Bill, hit someone”) (Maass & Arcuri, 1996; Maass, Ceccarielli, & Rudin, 1996; von Hippel, Sekaquaptewa, & Vargas, 1997). These actions allow us to spread positive characteristics to all members of our ingroup but reserve negative aspects for individual group members, thereby protecting the group’s image.
People also make trait attributions in ways that benefit their ingroups, just as they make trait attributions that benefit themselves . This general tendency, known as the ultimate attribution error, results in the tendency for each of the competing groups to perceive the other group extremely and unrealistically negatively (Hewstone, 1990). When an ingroup member engages in a positive behavior, we tend to see it as a stable internal characteristic of the group as a whole. Similarly, negative behaviors on the part of the outgroup are seen as caused by stable negative group characteristics. On the other hand, negative behaviors from the ingroup and positive behaviors from the outgroup are more likely to be seen as caused by temporary situational variables or by behaviors of specific individuals and are less likely to be attributed to the group.
Ingroup Favoritism Has Many Causes
Ingroup favoritism has a number of causes. For one, it is a natural part of social categorization—we categorize into ingroups and outgroups because it helps us simplify and structure our environment. It is easy, and perhaps even natural, to believe in the simple idea that “we are better than they are.” People who report that they have strong needs for simplifying their environments also show more ingroup favoritism (Stangor & Leary, 2006).
Ingroup favoritism also occurs at least in part because we belong to the ingroup and not the outgroup (Cadinu & Rothbart, 1996). We like people who are similar to ourselves, and we perceive other ingroup members as similar to us. This also leads us to favor other members of our ingroup, particularly when we can clearly differentiate them from members of outgroups. We may also prefer ingroups because they are more familiar to us (Zebrowitz, Bronstad, & Lee, 2007).
But the most important determinant of ingroup favoritism is simple self-enhancement. We want to feel good about ourselves, and seeing our ingroups positively helps us do so (Brewer, 1979). Being a member of a group that has positive characteristics provides us with the feelings of social identity— the positive self-esteem that we get from our group memberships . When we can identify ourselves as a member of a meaningful social group (even if it is a relatively trivial one), we can feel better about ourselves.
We are particularly likely to show ingroup favoritism when we are threatened or otherwise worried about our self-concept (Maner et al., 2005; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 2000). And people express higher self-esteem after they have been given the opportunity to derogate outgroups, suggesting that ingroup favoritism does make us feel good (Lemyre & Smith, 1985; Rubin & Hewstone, 1998). Furthermore, when individuals feel that the value of their ingroup is being threatened, they respond as if they are trying to regain their own self-worth—by expressing more positive attitudes toward ingroups and more negative attitudes toward outgroups (Branscombe, Wann, Noel, & Coleman, 1993; Spears, Doosje, & Ellemers, 1997). Fein and Spencer (1997) found that participants expressed less prejudice after they had been given the opportunity to affirm and make salient an important and positive part of their own self-concept. In short, when our group seems to be good, we feel good; when our group seems to be bad, we feel bad.
In some cases, we may be able to feel good about our group memberships even when our own individual outcomes are not so positive. Schmitt, Silvia, and Branscombe (2000) had groups of female college students perform a creativity task and then gave them feedback indicating that although they themselves had performed very poorly, another woman in their group had performed very well. Furthermore, in some experimental conditions, the women were told that the research was comparing the scores of men and women (which was designed to increase categorization by gender). In these conditions, rather than being saddened by the upward comparison with the other woman, participants used the successful performance of the other woman to feel good about themselves, as women.
When Ingroup Favoritism Does Not Occur
Although people have a general tendency to show ingroup favoritism, there are least some cases in which it does not occur. One situation in which ingroup favoritism is unlikely is when the members of the ingroup are clearly inferior to other groups on an important dimension. The players on a baseball team that has not won a single game all season are unlikely to be able to feel very good about themselves as a team and are pretty much forced to concede that the outgroups are better, at least as far as playing baseball is concerned. Members of low-status groups show less ingroup favoritism than do members of high-status groups and may even display outgroup favoritism, in which they admit that the other groups are better than they are (Clark & Clark, 1947).
Another case in which people judge other members of the ingroup very negatively occurs when a member of one’s own group behaves in a way that threatens the positive image of the ingroup. A student who behaves in a way unbecoming to university students, or a teammate who does not seem to value the importance of the team, is disparaged by the other group members, often more than the same behavior from an outgroup member would be. The strong devaluation of ingroup members who threaten the positive image and identity of the ingroup is known as the black sheep effect.
Personality and Cultural Determinants of Ingroup Favoritism
To this point, we have considered ingroup favoritism as a natural part of everyday life. Because the tendency to favor the ingroup is a normal byproduct of self-concern, most people do, by and large, prefer their ingroups over outgroups. And yet not everyone is equally ingroup-favoring in all situations. There are a number of individual difference measures that predict prejudice, and these differences become particularly likely to show up under circumstances in which the desire to protect the self becomes important (Guimond, Dambrun, Michinov, & Duarte, 2003).
Some people are more likely than others to show ingroup favoritism because they are particularly likely to rely on their group memberships to create a positive social identity. These differences in group identification can be measured through self-report measures such as the Collective Self-Esteem Scale (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992). The scale assesses the extent to which the individual values his or her memberships in groups in public and private ways, as well as the extent to which he or she gains social identity from those groups. People who score higher on the scale show more ingroup favoritism in comparison with those who score lower on it (Stangor & Thompson, 2002). The scale, from Luhtanen and Crocker (1992), is shown in Table 12.2.
| Membership | I am a worthy member of the social groups I belong to. |
| I feel I don’t have much to offer to the social groups I belong to [R]. | |
| I am a cooperative participant in the social groups I belong to. | |
| I often feel I’m an unclean member of my social group [R]. | |
| Private | I often regret that I belong to some of the social groups I do [R]. |
| In general, I’m glad to be a member of the social groups I belong to. | |
| Overall, I often feel that the social groups of which I am a member are not worthwhile [R]. | |
| I feel good about the social groups I belong to. | |
| Public | Overall, my social groups are considered good by others. |
| Most people consider my social groups, on the average, to be more ineffective than other social groups [R]. | |
| In general, others respect the social groups that I am a member of. | |
| In general, others think that the social groups I am a member of are unworthy [R]. | |
| Identity | Overall, my group memberships have very little to do with how I feel about myself [R]. |
| The social groups I belong to are an important reflection of who I am. | |
| The social groups I belong to are unimportant in my sense of what kind of a person I am [R]. | |
| In general, belonging to social groups is an important part of my self-image. | |
| [R] = Item is reversed before scoring. |
|---|
Another personality dimension that relates to the desires to protect and enhance the self and the ingroup and thus also relates to greater ingroup favoritism, and in some cases prejudice toward outgroups, is the personality dimension of authoritarianism (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950; Altemeyer, 1988). Authoritarianism is a personality dimension that characterizes people who prefer things to be simple rather than complex and who tend to hold traditional and conventional values . Authoritarians are ingroup-favoring in part because they have a need to self-enhance and in part because they prefer simplicity and thus find it easy to think simply: “We are all good and they are all less good.” Political conservatives tend to show more ingroup favoritism than do political liberals, perhaps because the former are more concerned with protecting the ingroup from threats posed by others (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003; Stangor & Leary, 2006).
People with strong goals toward other-concern display less ingroup favoritism and less prejudice. People who view it as particularly important to connect with and respect other people—those who are more focused on tolerance and fairness toward others—are less ingroup-favoring and more positive toward the members of groups other than their own. The desire to be fair and to accept others can be assessed by individual difference measures such as desire to control one’s prejudice (Plant & Devine, 1998) and humanism (Katz & Hass, 1988).
Social dominance orientation (SDO) is a personality variable that refers to the tendency to see and to accept inequality among different groups (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1995). People who score high on measures of SDO believe that there are and should be status differences among social groups, and they do not see these as wrong. High SDO individuals agree with statements such as “Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups,” “In getting what you want, it is sometimes necessary to use force against other groups,” and “It’s OK if some groups have more of a chance in life than others.” Those who are low on SDO, on the other hand, believe that all groups are relatively equal in status and tend to disagree with these statements. People who score higher on SDO also show greater ingroup favoritism.
Stereotyping and prejudice also varies across cultures. Spencer-Rodgers, Williams, Hamilton, Peng, and Wang (2007) tested the hypothesis that Chinese participants, because of their collectivist orientation, would find social groups more important than would Americans (who are more individualistic) and that as a result, they would be more likely to infer personality traits on the basis of group membership—that is, to stereotype. Supporting the hypothesis, they found that Chinese participants made stronger stereotypical trait inferences than Americans did on the basis of a target’s membership in a fictitious group.
Key Takeaways
- Ingroup favoritism is a fundamental and evolutionarily functional aspect of human perception, and it occurs even in groups that are not particularly meaningful.
- Ingroup favoritism is caused by a variety of variables, but particularly important is self-concern: We experience positive social identity as a result of our membership in valued social groups.
- Ingroup favoritism develops early in children and influences our behavior toward ingroup and outgroup members in a variety of ways.
- Personality dimensions that relate to ingroup favoritism include authoritarianism and social dominance orientation—dimensions that relate to less ingroup favoritism include a desire to control one’s prejudice and humanism.
- There are at least some cultural differences in the tendency to show ingroup favoritism and to stereotype others.
Exercises and Critical Thinking
- Consider some of the important social groups to which you belong. Do your group memberships lead to ingroup favoritism or even prejudice?
- Describe a time when the members of one of your important social groups behaved in a way that increased group identity (e.g., showing the black sheep effect). What was the outcome of the actions?
References
Aboud, F. E. (2003). The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children: Are they distinct attitudes? Developmental Psychology, 39 (1), 48–60.
Aboud, F. E., & Amato, M. (2001). Developmental and socialization influences on intergroup bias. In R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook in social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 65–85). New York, NY: Blackwell.
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality . New York, NY: Harper.
Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Amodio, D. M., & Devine, P. G. (2006). Stereotyping and evaluation in implicit race bias: Evidence for independent constructs and unique effects on behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 91 , 652–661.
Bennett, M., Barrett, M., Karakozov, R., Kipiani, G., Lyons, E., Pavlenko, V.…Riazanova., T. (2004). Young children’s evaluations of the ingroup and of outgroups: A multi-national study. Social Development, 13 (1), 124–141. doi: 10.1046/j.1467–9507.2004.00260.x.
Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3 , 27–52.
Branscombe, N. R., Wann, D. L., Noel, J. G., & Coleman, J. (1993). In-group or out-group extremity: Importance of the threatened social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19 , 381–388.
Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86 , 307–324.
Brewer, M. B., & Caporael, L. R. (2006). An evolutionary perspective on social identity: Revisiting groups. In M. Schaller, J. A. Simpson, & D. T. Kenrick (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 143–161). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Cadinu, M. R., & Rothbart, M. (1996). Self-anchoring and differentiation processes in the minimal group setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 (4), 661–677.
Castelli, L., & Carraro, L. (2010). Striving for difference: On the spontaneous preference for ingroup members who maximize ingroup positive distinctiveness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (6), 881–890. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.740.
Clark, K., & Clark, M. (1947). Racial identification and preference in Negro children. In E. Maccoby, T. Newcomb, & E. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 602–611). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Fein, S., & Spencer, S. J. (1997). Prejudice as self-image maintenance: Affirming the self through derogating others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73 , 31–44.
Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (4), 697–721. doi: 10.1037/0022–35<IP_ADDRESS>7.
Hewstone, M. (1990). The “ultimate attribution error”? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20 (4), 311–335.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129 (3), 339–375.
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 , 893–905.
Lemyre, L., & Smith, P. M. (1985). Intergroup discrimination and self-esteem in the minimal group paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 , 660–670.
Locksley, A., Ortiz, V., & Hepburn, C. (1980). Social categorization and discriminatory behavior: Extinguishing the minimal intergroup discrimination effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (5), 773–783. doi: 10.1037/0022–35<IP_ADDRESS>3.
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18 , 302–318.
Maass, A., & Arcuri, L. (1996). Language and stereotyping. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 193–226). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Maass, A., Ceccarielli, R., & Rudin, S. (1996). Linguistic intergroup bias: Evidence for in-group-protective motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71 (3), 512–526.
Mahajan, N., Martinez, M. A., Gutierrez, N. L., Diesendruck, G., Banaji, M. R., & Santos, L. R. (2011). The evolution of intergroup bias: Perceptions and attitudes in rhesus macaques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100 (3), 387–405. doi: 10.1037/a0022459.
Maner, J. K., Kenrick, D. T., Becker, D. V., Robertson, T. E., Hofer, B., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2005). Functional projection: How fundamentally social motives can bias interpersonal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 63–75.
Navarrete, C. D., Kurzban, R., Fessler, D. M. T., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2004). Anxiety and intergroup bias: Terror management or coalitional psychology? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 7 (4), 370–397.
Phelps, E. A., O’Connor, K. J., Cunningham, W. A., Funayama, E. S., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C.…Banaji, M. R. (2000). Performance on indirect measures of race evaluation predicts amygdala activation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12 (5), 729–738.
Pinter, B., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). A comparison of minimal group induction procedures. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14 (1), 81–98. doi: 10.1177/1368430210375251.
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (1998). Internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (3), 811–832.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1995). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 , 741–763.
Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (1998). Social identity theory’s self-esteem hypothesis: A review and some suggestions for clarification. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2 , 40–62.
Schmitt, M. T., Silvia, P. J., & Branscombe, N. R. (2000). The intersection of self-evaluation maintenance and social identity theories: Intragroup judgment in interpersonal and intergroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26 (12), 1598–1606.
Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88 (1), 91–107.
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2000). Pride and prejudice: Fear of death and social behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9 (6), 200–204.
Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Ellemers, N. (1997). Self-stereotyping in the face of threats to group status and distinctiveness: The role of group identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 , 538–553.
Spencer-Rodgers, J., Williams, M. J., Hamilton, D. L., Peng, K., & Wang, L. (2007). Culture and group perception: Dispositional and stereotypic inferences about novel and national groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (4), 525–543.
Stangor, C., & Leary, S. (2006). Intergroup beliefs: Investigations from the social side. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38 , 243–283.
Stangor, C., & Thompson, E. P. (2002). Needs for cognitive economy and self-enhancement as unique predictors of intergroup attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (4), 563–575. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.114.
Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223 , 96–102.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1 , 149–178.
Van Vugt, M., & Schaller, M. (2008). Evolutionary approaches to group dynamics: An introduction. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12 (1), 1–6.
von Hippel, W., Sekaquaptewa, D., & Vargas, P. (1997). The linguistic intergroup bias as an implicit indicator of prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33 (5), 490–509.
Zaraté, M. A., Stoever, C. J., MacLin, M. K., & Arms-Chavez, C. J. (2008). Neurocognitive underpinnings of face perception: Further evidence of distinct person and group perception processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (1), 108–115.
Zebrowitz, L. A., Bronstad, P. M., & Lee, H. K. (2007). The contribution of face familiarity to ingroup favoritism and stereotyping. Social Cognition, 25 (2), 306–338. doi: 10.1521/soco.2<IP_ADDRESS>6


12.1: Introducing Research and Research Evidence
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Articulate how research evidence and sources are key rhetorical concepts in presenting a position or an argument.
- Locate and distinguish between primary and secondary research materials.
- Implement methods and technologies commonly used for research and communication within various fields.
The writing tasks for this chapter and the next two chapters are based on argumentative research. However, not all researched evidence (data) is presented in the same genre. You may need to gather evidence for a poster, a performance, a story, an art exhibit, or even an architectural design. Although the genre may vary, you usually will be required to present a perspective , or viewpoint, about a debatable issue and persuade readers to support the “validity of your viewpoint,” as discussed in Position Argument: Practicing the Art of Rhetoric. Remember, too, that a debatable issue is one that has more than a single perspective and is subject to disagreement.
The Research Process
Although individual research processes are rhetorically situated, they share some common aspects:
- Interest. The researcher has a genuine interest in the topic. It may be difficult to fake curiosity, but it is possible to develop it. Some academic assignments will allow you to pursue issues that are personally important to you; others will require you to dive into the research first and generate interest as you go.
- Questions. The researcher asks questions. At first, these questions are general. However, as researchers gain more knowledge, the questions become more sharply focused. No matter what your research assignment is, begin by articulating questions, find out where the answers lead, and then ask still more questions.
- Answers. The researcher seeks answers from people as well as from print and other media. Research projects profit when you ask knowledgeable people, such as librarians and other professionals, to help you answer questions or point you in directions to find answers. Information about research is covered more extensively in Research Process: Accessing and Recording Information and Annotated Bibliography: Gathering, Evaluating, and Documenting Sources.
- Field research. The researcher conducts field research. Field research allows researchers not only to ask questions of experts but also to observe and experience directly. It allows researchers to generate original data. No matter how much other people tell you, your knowledge increases through personal observations. In some subject areas, field research is as important as library or database research. This information is covered more extensively in Research Process: Accessing and Recording Information.
- Examination of texts. The researcher examines texts. Consulting a broad range of texts—such as magazines, brochures, newspapers, archives, blogs, videos, documentaries, or peer-reviewed journals—is crucial in academic research.
- Evaluation of sources. The researcher evaluates sources. As your research progresses, you will double-check information to find out whether it is confirmed by more than one source. In informal research, researchers evaluate sources to ensure that the final decision is satisfactory. Similarly, in academic research, researchers evaluate sources to ensure that the final product is accurate and convincing. Previewed here, this information is covered more extensively in Research Process: Accessing and Recording Information.
- Writing. The researcher writes. The writing during the research process can take a range of forms: from notes during library, database, or field work; to journal reflections on the research process; to drafts of the final product. In practical research, writing helps researchers find, remember, and explore information. In academic research, writing is even more important because the results must be reported accurately and thoroughly.
- Testing and Experimentation. The researcher tests and experiments. Because opinions vary on debatable topics and because few research topics have correct or incorrect answers, it is important to test and conduct experiments on possible hypotheses or solutions.
- Synthesis. The researcher synthesizes. By combining information from various sources, researchers support claims or arrive at new conclusions. When synthesizing, researchers connect evidence and ideas, both original and borrowed. Accumulating, sorting, and synthesizing information enables researchers to consider what evidence to use in support of a thesis and in what ways.
- Presentation. The researcher presents findings in an interesting, focused, and well-documented product.
Types of Research Evidence
Research evidence usually consists of data, which comes from borrowed information that you use to develop your thesis and support your organizational structure and reasoning. This evidence can take a range of forms, depending on the type of research conducted, the audience, and the genre for reporting the research.
Primary Research Sources
Although precise definitions vary somewhat by discipline, primary data sources are generally defined as firsthand accounts, such as texts or other materials produced by someone drawing from direct experience or observation. Primary source documents include, but are not limited to, personal narratives and diaries; eyewitness accounts; interviews; original documents such as treaties, official certificates, and government documents detailing laws or acts; speeches; newspaper coverage of events at the time they occurred; observations; and experiments. Primary source data is, in other words, original and in some way conducted or collected primarily by the researcher. The Research Process: Where to Look for Existing Sources and Compiling Sources for an Annotated Bibliography contain more information on both primary and secondary sources.
Secondary Research Sources
Secondary sources , on the other hand, are considered at least one step removed from the experience. That is, they rely on sources other than direct observation or firsthand experience. Secondary sources include, but are not limited to, most books, articles online or in databases, and textbooks (which are sometimes classified as tertiary sources because, like encyclopedias and other reference works, their primary purpose might be to summarize or otherwise condense information). Secondary sources ( https://openstax.org/r/ secondarysources1) regularly cite and build upon primary sources to provide perspective and analysis. Effective use of researched evidence usually includes both primary and secondary sources. Works of history, for example, draw on a large range of primary and secondary sources, citing, analyzing, and synthesizing information to present as many perspectives of a past event in as rich and nuanced a way as possible.
It is important to note that the distinction between primary and secondary sources depends in part on their use: that is, the same document can be both a primary source and a secondary source. For example, if Scholar X wrote a biography about Artist Y, the biography would be a secondary source about the artist and, at the same time, a primary source about the scholar.


5.4: Paths
Paths
A graph is a walk if and only if the vertices can be labeled \(v_0, v_1, \ldots, v_k\) such that \(v_i, v_{i+1}\) is an edge.
A graph is a trail if and only if it is a walk such that no edge is used twice.
A graph is a path if and only if it is a walk such that no vertex is used twice.
A path on \(n\) vertices is denoted \(P_n.\) Please note that these terms ( walk , trail , and path ) vary widely including reversing the names, so always check the definition in the article, book, or other material you are reading.
A trail is Eulerian if and only if it uses every edge in the graph.
A path is Hamiltonian if and only if it uses every vertex in that graph.
Practice
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{6}\)
Draw a path of length 5. Note this is denoted \(P_5.\)
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{8}\)
Find a walk that is not a trail in Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\)
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{9}\)
Find a trail that is not a path in Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\)
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{10}\)
Determine which graphs in Figure 5.2.43 have Eulerian trails.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{11}\)
Determine which graphs in Figure 5.2.43 have Hamiltonian paths.
Connected
A graph \(G\) is connected if and only if for every pair of vertices \(v,w\) there exists a path from \(v\) to \(w.\)
A graph \(G\) is \(n\)-connected if and only if removing any \(n-1\) vertices does not disconnect the graph.
Practice
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{14}\)
Determine which of the graphs in Figure 5.1.1 are connected.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{15}\)
Explain why every complete graph is connected.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{16}\)
Explain why every complete bipartite graph is connected.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{17}\)
Determine if every bipartite graph must be connected.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{18}\)
For each of the graphs in Figure 5.2.43 and Figure 5.2.44 determine the maximum \(n\) for which the graph is \(n\)-connected.
Checkpoint \(\PageIndex{19}\)
If a graph is \(n\)-connected what does this say about the minimum of the number of paths between any two vertices?


2.9: Plant Stand
|
Plant Stand
American Neighbor of Stugard Family, 1899 Wood (willow sapling) Gift of Lucille (Stugard) McKee MHAHS 2001.101.0121 |
This handmade willow plant stand was once a neighbor’s wedding gift to a young farming couple from Wisconsin’s Springdale township. Toward the end of the 19th century, the Arts and Crafts Movement shaped England and America’s preference for artistic handmade domestic goods. Movement commentators emphasized the economic and moral health of communities whose members practiced artistic skills utilizing local resources. Such sentiments survive in today’s non-professional Do-It-Yourself culture and professional crafts, which market the decorative appeal of rustic, unfinished furnishings and home adornments.
For a complete essay on this object, click here.
This 1899 Plant Stand exemplifies rural handicrafts in the Midwest circa 1900 while commenting on 19th century do-it-yourself, or D.I.Y. culture, not entirely different from our own in 2017. Today, a web search for willow or twig furniture returns dozens of do-it-yourself samples from popular craft sites such as Etsy, Pinterest, and HGTV announcing nostalgic descriptors such as “homemade” and “rustic”. Woven into the twists and folds of willow furniture is a craft tradition still alive today, sustained by practiced craftsman or by novice consumers drawn to the rustic charm of unrefined accessories.
Such 19th through 21st-century craftsman share common experiences involved in gathering and utilizing resources from the land in aesthetic and utilitarian ways that contribute to a sense of place-connectedness and to community prosperity. Some 19th century writers advocated for the transformative power of crafts for the well-being of the entire rural community. At the same time, the craftsman’s individual talent and character was essential to their practice. Commentator on the American Arts and Crafts Movement, Zueblin says, “thus are fashioned objects to be cherished and valued on account of their personal feeling and character, and such are the fireside arts done by talented individuals.”[1] Such sentimental writings on the Arts and Crafts movement expresses the romance such objects held for people in 1903.
Twig furniture, occasionally referenced in 19th and 20th century home fashion magazines, is typically associated with anonymous craftsmen and rustic styles, appealing to consumers’ desire for local and natural materials. In the case of the Stugard plant stand, the craftsman is unidentified; even their sex and trade are unknown, shrouding him or her in a degree of mystery. Though the plant stand’s anonymous maker leaves viewers with little indication of his or her personal biography, the plant stand, a neighbor’s wedding gift preserved for over 100 years, likely possessed the “cherished and valued” personal worth Zueblin describes. Furthermore, the Zueblin connects rural handicraft with ties to both nature and personal feeling along with the satisfaction of working out technical problems and skill development.
In addition to speaking to the 19th and early 20th century philosophies on the qualities of a prosperous rural town dependent upon the participation and skill specialization of its population, the plant stand is an interesting impression of a much larger 19th and early 20th-century interest in wicker or rattan furnishings often made from willow twigs, reeds, and other pliant twig plants. In her book, Rustic Furniture , Sue Honacker Stephenson argues that twig furniture possesses a “decorative symbolism” that functions as a rebellion against commercial and industrial excess, an ideology directly referencing and responding to the Arts and Crafts Movement. She goes on to interpret the furniture as a statement against modern consumption though the objects denial of industrial facture and its embrace of unfinished material. “As a decorative symbol, a rustic seat is astonishingly literal, being constructed of the bare roots of trees.”[2] Richard Saunders claims that wicker furniture “captured the mood of the times to a ‘T,’ reveling in the adoration of the home as an island of refuge that celebrated any handmade or eclectic decoration.”[3] Likewise, countless primary sources, from advertisements to articles on home decoration, emphasize the appeal of willow furnishings. Between 1911 and 1915, the periodical Art & Decoration published articles by various authors titled “The Informal Note in Summer Furniture,” “The Use and Beauty of Willow Furniture,” (Figure 4.) and “The Adaptable Willow: Its Appeal of Structure Line and Form.” (Figure 5.)[4] At the same time, advertisements use language such as “The Final Note of Comfort,” “Hand – Wrought Willow Furniture commands a place in even the most lavish home,” “no other investment insures artistic results at such a low cost,” (Figure 6.) [5] and “see these unique pieces to realize the home-like atmosphere they impart.”[6] Advertisements highlight desirable qualities inherent in willow furnishings including being handmade, artistic, and low cost.
Handmade willow plant stands demonstrate the resourcefulness and skill of the 19th century rural community and the anonymous individuals that contributed to binding and supportive relationships that created a prosperous community unit. Aesthetically appealing wicker furnishings introduced nature to the home through its rustic, natural finish and simple, plantlike structure, resonating with both ideals of natural beauty and tranquility as well as contemporary home fashions with its class implications. In developing and exercising their skill, rural craftsmen supported both the utilitarian as well as aesthetically moralizing needs of his or her community.
References
[1] Rho Fisk Zueblin, “The Arts and Crafts Movement: The Production of Industrial Art in America II,” The Chautauquan; A Weekly Newsmagazine (1880-1914) 37 (April 1903): 59.
[2]Sue Honacker Stephenson, Rustic Furniture. (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1979).
[3] Richard Saunders, The Collector’s Guide to American Wicker Furniture, (New York: Hearst Books, 1983).
[4] Matlock Price, “The Adaptable Willow: Its Appeal of Structural Line and Form,” Arts & Decoration (1910-1911) 1 (October 1911): 482-483.; D. D. McCall, “The Use and Beauty of Willow Furniture.” Arts & Decoration (1910-1911) 1 (March 1911): 221-222.; Mortimer Marke, “The Informal Note in Summer Furniture,” Arts & Decoration (1910-1918) 10 (April 1915): 232-233.
[5] “Back Matter.” Arts & Decoration. (September 1911): 456.
[6] Advertisement by Joseph P. McHugh & Son of New York.