Casey et al (2011)

Question 1

Background of the study

Answer 1

-The ability to delay gratification refers to the ability to resist a small reward now in favour of a greater reward in the future
-From the 1960s marshmallow test, children were labelled ‘low’ or ‘high’ delayers

Question 2

Low delayers

Answer 2

The children that were unable to wait and and just ate the marshmallow straight away

Question 3

High delayers

Answer 3

The children that were able to wait and got two marshmallows

Question 4

Hot cues

Answer 4

Things that we find tempting and appealing

Question 5

Cold cues

Answer 5

Things that we find neutral

Question 6

Cooling strategies

Answer 6

Focusing on cool cues to try and resist the temptation of a hot cue

Question 7

Aim of the study (1)

Answer 7

Casey wanted to find out whether the people who had difficulties delaying gratification at the age pf four would still have difficulties delaying gratification 40 years later

Question 8

Sample (1)

Answer 8

-Taken from people who participated in the original marshmallow test
-27 low delayers and 32 high delayers
-All aged 44

Question 9

Experimental design (1)

Answer 9

-Independent measures-high and low delayers
-Repeated measures-did both hot and cool tasks

Question 10

Procedure (1)

Answer 10

-Go/no-go task
-Shown as series of faces ‘cool’ had neutral expressions ‘hot’ had happy/fearful expressions
-Press button when they saw the fearful faces, but hold back for happy faces

Question 11

Controls (1)

Answer 11

-Same faces used
-Displayed for 500ms
-One second in between faces

Question 12

Findings/conclusions (1)

Answer 12

-High delayers were found to be better at resisting pressing the button when seeing a happy face than the low delayers
-Suggest that the ability to delay gratification is a relatively stable characteristic within people

Question 13

Aim (2)

Answer 13

Casey wanted to see if there was a brain based explanation for the ability to delay gratification

Question 14

Sample (2)

Answer 14

-27 participants from the initial study agreed to participate
-11 low delayers, 15 high delayers
-Data for one participant removed due to poor task performance

Question 15

Procedure (2)

Answer 15

-Casey got participants to repeat ‘Go/No-Go’ task
-However this time in a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
-Measured what parts of the brain were active during the task

Question 16

Findings/conclusions (2)

Answer 16

-When low-delayers saw happy faces, they had less activity in the inferior frontal gyrus than the high delayers (cool part)
-Low-delayers then had more activity in their ventral striatum, which is associated with rewards (hot part)
-From this Casey concluded that differences in peoples abilities to show self-control and delay gratification can be related to neurological differences

Question 17

How does this study link to the nature/nurture debate

Answer 17

-Nature
-Gratification is a stable characteristic and links to brain structure/activity

Question 18

How does this study link to the freewill/determinism debate

Answer 18

-Determinism
-Delay of gratification determined by activity in inferior frontal gyrus and ventral striatum

Question 19

How does this study link to the individual/situational explanations debate

Answer 19

-Individual
-Due to brain activity so delay of gratification wouldn’t change dependent on situation
-Investigated individual differences in delay of gratification which were stable over time

Question 20

How could the study be seen as socially sensitive?

Answer 20

People may be upset that their ability to resist temptation is out of their control

Question 21

How does the study link to the reductionism/holism debate?

Answer 21

-Holism
-The study looked at both behavioural and biological explanations of delay of gratification

Question 22

How does the study relate to the biological area?

Answer 22

Focuses on the areas of the brain that are active when resisting temptation

Question 23

Two similarities between Casey and Sperry’s studies

Answer 23

-Highly controlled procedures
-Both were quasi experiments

Question 24

Explain the similarity ‘highly controlled procedures’

Answer 24

-Sperry- participants saw the same images, which were all shown for 1/10 of a second
-Casey- Participants all saw the same faces displayed for 500ms, with a one second gap

Question 25

Explain the similarity ‘both were quasi experiments’

Answer 25

-Sperry- the IV of participants being epileptic and having the commissurotomy was naturally occouring
-Casey- the brain structure/delay of gratification was a naturally occurring IV

Question 26

Two differences between Casey and Sperry’s studies

Answer 26

-Lasted different time periods
-Different tech used

Question 27

Explain the difference ‘lasted different time periods’

Answer 27

-Sperry- snapshot, the study was completed within a day
-Casey- longitudinal, the same participants were used when they were 4 and then 44

Question 28

Explain the difference ‘different tech used’

Answer 28

-Sperry- used a tachistoscope to display images to one visual field
-Casey- used a fMRI scanner to see activity in the ventral striatum and inferior frontal gyrus

Question 29

How has the study changed our understanding of the key them ‘regions of the brain’?

Answer 29

-Sperry only researched corpus colossum, whereas Casey gave us explanations for the inferior frontal gyrus and the ventral striatum
-Gives us new ways of measuring brain function-Casey used fMRI, whilst Sperry used a tachistoscope

Question 30

How hasn’t the study changed our understanding of the key them ‘regions of the brain’?

Answer 30

-Study still supports the idea of ‘localisation of control’, where different parts of the brain control different functions

Question 31

How the study has changed our understanding of individual diversity

Answer 31

Sperry studied people with ‘abnormal’ brains, whilst Casey studied people with ‘normal’ brains

Question 32

How the study has changed our understanding of social diversity

Answer 32

Casey found there were small differences in brain function between ‘normal’ people, which wasn’t known before

Question 33

How the study hasn’t changed our understanding of cultural diversity

Answer 33

Sperry and Casey were both studying the brain structures of Americans only, and neither of their studies attempted to include people from different cultural backgrounds