debates Flashcards
describe the nature vs nurture debate
the nature/nurture debate considers the influence of biological factors such as genes, the brain and hormones vs the enviroment has on our behaviour
nature believes that we behave in the way we do due to our internal biology- this is supported by the physiological approach which believes that biological factors such as hormones, brain structure, genes and neurotransmitters determine behaviour
nurture believes that behaviour is determined by the environment and past experiences- this is supported by the behaviourist perspective as they believe we are all born blank and the situations we are put in determine our behaviour
what is the interactionist approach
the interactionist approach believes in both nature and nurture- how they interact with eachother determines our behaviour
e.g maguire, blakemoore and cooper believe we are born with pre-dispositions but it is down to the environment we are exposed to which determines how these predispositions are shown in our behaviour
give arguments for researching this debate
useful as if we find out if behaviours are due to either nature or nurture we can intervene with either biology or environment of individuals to bring about change
e.g for nature- arguably more scientific data gathered as we can do brain scans and medication can be developed
for nurture- arguably easier to change our environment than our biology
example studies- bandura, chaney (nurture) casey (nature)
give arguments against researching this debate
its too reductionist- too simplistic to divide complex behaviours into either nature or nurture when most behaviour are probably interactionist- therefore focusing on whether behaviour is due to nature or nurture is invalid
by presuming some behaviours are just nature or nurture soley (and therefore just researching one factor) may stunt future research and findings, reducing usefulness
e.g casey
describe the free will vs determinism debate
determinism is the belief tat behaviours are controlled by factors- either internal like our biology or ecternal like our life experiences
free will is the belief that our behaviour is a result of our own choice- that we act based on how we want and choose to, free from the influence of any factors
outline the 2 types of determinism
internal/biological determinism is where a person is being determined by factors within themselves such as biology and innate drives
external/environmental determinism is where a person is being determined by factors outside of themselves e.g environment
what do humanists believe
humanists believe that individuals have free will and have the choice to decide to behave in a particular way- everyone is unique and has free will over how to act.
people are in control of their lives and actions
maslow and rogers are two main advocates of humanism
what is meant by ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ determinism
all of psychology is deterministic to a degre but some are more deterministic than others
e.g behaviourism is classed as ‘hard’ determinism because it suggests that we respond passively to situations e.g if we recieve a positive reinforcement we will repeat the behaviour- we have no free will in this at all
other approaches like cognitive are classes as being ‘soft’ determinism- we are still controlled by our schemas, past experiences and expectations but we still have a degree of free will over how we think about them e.g the ABC model
give arguments in favour of deterministic research
the process of the studies tend to be more scientific and controlled, so are more reliable and the conclusions can be tested over and over again to establish temporal validity e.g loftus and palmer
being deterministic allows us to form rules and predict human behaviour. thi makes the world more understandable and arguably the research findings are more useful and treatments can then be produced to help e.g bandura
give arguments against deterministic research
deterministic research is reductionist as it is often carried out in a lab or high levels of control are implemented so lack extraneous variables. this compromises the reliability of the findings as the research fails to consider other factors that may have produced the behaviour
deterministic explanations remove moral responsibility from the individual- this may be a problem with things like criminality
e.g bandura
describe the reductionism vs holism debate
reductionism is where you take the simplistic explanation that behaviour is due to one factor- this approach assumes that the scientific principle should be used and that all behaviour should be explained using the simplest possible explanation
holism is where you consider how different factors contribute to behaviour, rather than trying to reduce the explanation to just one factor. holism believes that behaviour is too complex to be broken down therefore we need to look into numerous factors and how these factors interact to cause behaviour
give arguments in favour of reductionist research
more scientific if one component is isolated and others are controlled then the study is more objective and scientifically acceptable
e.g bandura, loftus and palmer
can be useful as it is deterministic- one thing is causing behaviour which is arguably more useful as we can intervene with this factor to produce desirable behaviours e.g bandura
give arguments against reductionist research
over simplified- human behaviour is complex and interactions between different factors may cause behaviour in a way that does not happen when looking at one factor alone- therefore it may be more useful to be holistic
e.g casey
issues with validity- components of behaviour may be difficult to isolate properly in reductionist research and so we cannot be sure of cause and effect e.g milgram
describe the ethnocentrism vs social/cultural relativism debate
ethnocentrism means only seeing the world from ones own cultural perspective and believing that one perspective is both normal and correct
social/ cultural relativism is the view that all behaviours, attitudes, values and concepts should be understood in the light of their own culture and not judged according to the standards of a different culture- the relativist idea challenges the universal application of psychology because research that has been developed in one culture may not be applicable in another
give arguments in favour of ethnocentric research
its easier and more practical e.g more time and cost effective to carry out research in one culture rather than spending time and expense travelling and sourcing many samples
some approaches such as the physiological approach may not be weakened by adopting ethnocentric methods as there are potentially few significant biological differences between cultures
give arguments against ethnocentric research
not generalisable or valid- it is ignorant to presume all cultures react the same in all situations as one culture may encourage/ discourage certain behaviours so socially relative research may be needed
it can be argued it is damaging/ bias to judge all cultures from one paradigm and may suggest one culture is superior
