Chaney et al (2004) Flashcards
in Australia how many children have asthma
1 in 4
what devices are generally used to measure correct dosage of asthma medication in Australia
Aerochamber and Breath-a-tech
what type of operant conditioning do asthma inhalers promote and why
negative reinforcement (remove unpleasant symptoms of asthma)
how did Chaney et al use positive reinforcement to promote the use of asthma medication in children
created a Funhaler, a whistle would sound and a disk would spin around when a child exhaled a good steady breath
name the sampling method, research technique and experimental design used in this study
opportunity sampling, field experiment, repeated measures
describe the sample used in this study
- 32 children from Perth, Western Australia
- 22 boys, 10 girls
- ages 1(1/2)-6
how were the participants recruited in this study
recruited from seven paediatric or GP clinics within a 51km radius of perth (all different socioeconomic backgrounds and geographic areas)
describe the first step of the procedure in this study
- parents contacted by phone via their GP or paediatrician , then visited at home
- written, informed consent obtained from parents before filling in a questionnaire about their child’s current inhaler spacer device
- not aware of funhaler at this point
describe the second step of the procedure in this study
- parents given a funhaler to use with their child for two weeks
- parents contacted at random times and asked if their child had correctly used the funhaler the previous day
describe the third step of the procedure in this study
- after 2 weeks parents contacted and given another questionnaire to complete
- this one asked about the funhaler device
describe the results in terms of children achieving the desired delivery of asthma medication (behaviour)
before: 50% of children had achieved the desired delivery with previous asthma inhaler spacer device
after: 80% of children achieved the desired delivery with funhaler spacer device
what is the desired delivery for asthma medication
four or more breath cycles per delivery
describe the results in terms of dislike towards inhaler spacer device (attitude)
before: 16% dislike towards regular inhaler spacer device
after: 0% dislike towards funhaler spacer device
describe the results in terms of use of the inhaler the day before
before: 59% of parents claimed their child used inhaler the day before
after: 81% of parents claimed their child used the inhaler the day before
describe the results in terms of attitudes towards inhaler spacer device
before: 10% of parents said they liked their childs inhaler spacer device
after: 61% of parents said they liked the funhaler spacer device
what is more important, results in terms of behaviour or attitude
- attitude
- it is a greater predictor than a change in behaviour as it means participants will continue using the funhaler spacer device after the study (will have a greater long-term effect)
describe the overall conclusions of this study
the funhaler led to an increased use and correct use of the inhaler with four or more breaths per cycle. parents were less likely to give up and resort to nebuliser after using funhalers
evaluate this study in terms of the nature-nurture debate
- nature (asthma is innate)
- nurture (based on upbringing, having parents that encourage the use of the funhaler)
this study is on the side of nurture
evaluate the study in terms of the freewill-determinism debate
- freewill (some parents or kids may have chosen not to administer the funhaler)
- determinism (you can’t control having access to the funhaler, how parent feel about the funhaler, what parents decide to do regarding the funhaler and the severity of asthma)
this study is on the side of determinism
evaluate the study in terms of the reductionism-holism debate
-reductionism (use of the funhaler increases use of inhaler correctly)
- holism (behaviour and attitudes and how they interact with each other determines the use of the funhaler)
this study is on the side of reductionism
evaluate this study in terms of its social sensitivity
- not (has practical real-life uses, can be given to kids to improve their health and quality of life)
- is (parents may be embarrassed if their kid has asthma but doesn’t have a funhaler, could be seen as worse than other parents)
how does this study relate to the behaviourist perspective
it explains how children are learning behaviours through operant conditioning (eg positive reinforcement)
how does this study relate to the theme of ‘external influences on children’s behaviour’
the external influence (the funhaler) is encouraging the children to use their inhaler correctly (changing their medical compliance)
how does this study relate to the developmental area
it shows how children’s behaviour can change due to experience of using the funhaler
name the similarities between Bandura and Chaney et al
- both studied young children
- both sit on the ‘nurture’ side of the debate
describe how Bandura and Chaney et al both study young children
bandura et al: studied children aged 37-69 months old from stanford university nursery
chaney et al: studied children 1.5-6 years old suffering from asthma, around Perth in Western Australia
describe how Bandura et al and Chaney et al both sit on the ‘nurture’ side of the debate
bandura et al: experience of watching an aggressive model can make children imitate these actions- behaviour is learnt from the environment
chaney et al: experience of using a funhaler changed childrens compliance towards asthma medication
name the differences between bandura et al and chaney et al
- differences in how they collected data
- differences in their experimental design used
describe how bandura et al and chaney et al collected data differently
bandura et al: collected data using observation (20min in stage 3 through a one-way mirror)
chaney et al: collected data through self-report (questionnaires about behaviours and attitudes towards the previous inhaler spacer device and funhaler spacer device)
describe how bandura et al and chaney et al have different experimental designs
bandura et al: used matched participants design (pre-testing children on a 5 point scale of aggression)
chaney et al: used repeated measures (same participants given questionnaires about use of regular inhaler spacer device and then one on the funhaler two weeks later)
how has Chaney’s study changed our idea on the key theme of ‘external influences on children’s behaviour’
shown us that the behaviour of children can be changed by reinforcement rather than just by observing and imitating role models
how hasn’t Chaney’s study changed our idea on the key theme of ‘external influences on children’s behaviour’
both studies still only telling us about young children
how hasn’t Chaney and banduras studies changed our idea on our understanding of individual diversity
doesn’t explore the reasons for individual differences in behaviour between children (in terms of how they behaved in the study)
how hasn’t Chaney and banduras studies changed our idea on our understanding of social diversity
the children in the studies are from the same age group, both include boys and girls
how hasn’t Chaney and banduras studies changed our idea on our understanding of cultural diversity
both carried out in economically developed ‘western’ cultures
how has Chaney’s study changed our idea on our understanding of cultural diversity
Chaney’s studied was carried out in Australia and not the USA like Banduras
