Task: Your task is to create an engaging social media post that debunks a myth or piece of misinformation about a subject inhealth psychology. Please

Task: Your task is to create an engaging social media post that debunks a myth or piece of misinformation about a subject inhealth psychology.

Please create an infographic on the topic: Therapy does nothing for mental health.

Your audience is the average person using social media/YouTube.Imagine an 18-40-year-old individual living in the US. They areNOT experts in psychology or the field of health psychology. Your job is to create engaging content that informs them about theimportant parts of your topic.

You must submit TWO documents:1. An attachment of your content.2. A short summary (approx. 500 words) explaining the myth or piece of misinformation, and a review of the literature/article(s) you summarized in your post that refute this myth/misinformation.o The summary should include a ONE sentence take-away message that you hope viewers got out of your social media post. This is the main message that your post is trying to relay. This is the conclusion you want a viewer to walk away with.o The summary should include a reference page with the reference(s) you discussed in APA style. Three (3) references are required. The reference page does NOT count toward your word count.

Format: infographic  

Share This Post

Email
WhatsApp
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
Reddit

Order a Similar Paper and get 15% Discount on your First Order

Related Questions

Please write an introduction following the grading rubic below and the thematic grid attached from the listed 5 articles. Grading

Please write an introduction following the grading rubic below and the thematic grid attached from the listed 5 articles. Grading Rubric:                                                                         Poor                                  Excellent Possible Introduction                                                   13.75   16.25   18.75   21.25   23.75   25 Start w/problem statement – why do this?  And lead into a theory – why do we predict the  variables to be related? Theories explain why Review

Please follow the attached literature grid and provide an introduction for the five (5) articles listed below. 1. Bänninger-Huber, E., & Salvenauer, S.

Please follow the attached literature grid and provide an introduction for the five (5) articles listed below. 1. Bänninger-Huber, E., & Salvenauer, S. (2023). Different types of laughter and their function foremotion regulation in dyadic interactions. Current Psychology: A Journal for DiversePerspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 42(28), 24249–24259. 2. Cai,

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is Dead”Revisited).Introduction: Bjorklund’s paper argues for a new organizational structure for cognitive development. This structure is most compatible with core-knowledge and dynamic-systems theories discussed in chapter 4, but also encompasses major aspects of

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is Dead”Revisited).Introduction: Bjorklund’s paper argues for a new organizational structure for cognitive development. This structure is most compatible with core-knowledge and dynamic-systems theories discussed in chapter 4, but also encompasses major aspects of

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is

SUBJECT: CHILD PSYCHOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS: Part 1: Article ReviewRead Bjorklund (2018) A metatheory for cognitive development (or “Piaget is Dead”Revisited).Introduction: Bjorklund’s paper argues for a new organizational structure for cognitivedevelopment. This structure is most compatible with core-knowledge and dynamic-systems theories discussed in chapter 4, but also encompasses major aspects ofinformation-processing theories