3.1.2 Individual differences exp. 1: Cognitive Factors Evaluation

Question 1

Yochelson & Samenow (1976) #1

Answer 1

Sample size

weakness- only 30 took part in the actual interviews

strength- had relevance and was able to do in depth analysis of the 30

Question 2

Yochelson & Samenow (1976) #2

Answer 2

Biased sample

Participants who were interested in
therapy may have took part in all of the interviews- potentially different errors in thinking compared to those not interested in therapy.

Question 3

Yochelson & Samenow (1976) #3

Answer 3

Longitudinal study

Could expose threats to:
1. internal validity- potential of interviewer bias-
trust
2. developing between researcher and
participant.

Question 4

Yochelson & Samenow (1976) #4

Answer 4

No control group used for comparison

lack of Internal validity - errors not unique to criminals

Question 5

Wallinius et al. (2011)

Answer 5

Biased sample- Swedish

Use of self-report questionnaire- is
this a valid measurement of cognitive
distortion?

Additional validity issues

No causal relationship

Question 6

Kolhberg (1968) #1

Answer 6

Biased sample:

Culture-biased and gender-biased >
Kohlberg’s research was based only on male samples.

Carol Gilligan (1982) suggested that the theory is focused on a male-perspective – one of justice
rather than caring

Question 7

Kolhberg (1968) #2

Answer 7

Validity:

Social desirability bias, hypothetical situations for children.

Question 8

kolberg (1968) #3

Answer 8

One major issue is that Kohlberg’s theory
concerns moral thinking rather than behaviour

Dennis Krebs and Kathy Denton (2005) suggest
that moral principle are only one factor in moral
behaviour and may be overridden by more
practical factors, such as making personal
financial gains.

found when analysing real-life moral decisions, that moral principles were used to justify behaviour after it had been performed.