Debates, Areas, Perspectives Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Biological area

A

How your biology affects your behaviour

Genetics, brain, nerves, hormones (internal factors)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Biological area strengths and weaknesses

A

S- understanding of our physiognomy

  • scientific
  • internally reliable
  • internally valid

W-limitations on data collection rely on self report

  • reductionist
  • not ecologically valid
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Studies that relate to biological area

A

Sperry - separate brain hemispheres and their functions
Blakemore and Cooper - visual cortex and brain plasticity
Maguire - hippocampus and brain plasticity
Casey - roles of the inferior frontal gyrus and ventral striatum

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Biological area points for comparison

A
Lab experiments 
Low ecological validity 
High internal reliability 
High internal validity 
Scientific 
Biological determinism 
Nature side of the debate 
Reductionist
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Cognitive area

A

Mind works like a computer - Inputting, processing, storing and retrieving information
Focus on internal mental processes (memory, attention, perception etc) can influence our behaviour
People make decisions based on how they behave

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of cognitive area

A

S-understanding and improving mental processes

  • extraneous variables are controlled
  • highly replicable

W-rely on self report

  • demand characteristics
  • lacks ecological validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Studies to in cognitive area

A

Moray - auditory attention, internal process
Loftus and Palmer - reconstructive memory
Grant - context-dependent memory
Simons and Chabris - visual attention

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Cognitive area points of comparison

A
Lab experiments 
Lack ecological validity 
Relies on self report 
Adult participants 
Both sides of individual and situational debate 
Ethical
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Developmental area

A

Behaviour is learned from environment
Early experiences affect later behaviour
Assumes behaviour changes over time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of developmental

A

S- useful for child care

  • both quantitative and qualitative data
  • reduce participant variables - study same ps over time

W-children so ethical issues

  • research is constrained to time
  • usually small samples
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Studies in developmental area

A

Bandura - behaviour affected by a model
Kohlberg - changes in morality with age
Chaney - influence of funhaler on behaviour
Lee - differences in truth and lie telling across cultures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Developmental points for comparison

A
Holistic view 
Focuses on children 
Cross-cultural 
Both quantitative and qualitative data
Nurture 
Unethical - children 
Situational
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Social area

A

We behave differently depending on social roles or presence of Others
Other people and the environment influence our behaviour
Relationships with people influence our behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of social area

A

S- practical applications

  • explains real life events
  • understand human behaviour better

W- ethnocentric

  • time restricted
  • socially sensitive
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Studies in social area

A

Milgram - influence of authoritative figure on obedience
Piliavin - influence of people on helping others
Bocchiaro - obedience and whistle blowing with an authoritative figure
Levine - helping people who are struggling

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Social points for comparison

A
Field experiments 
Lack ecological validity sometimes 
Mainly quantitative data
Free will - determinism 
Situational 
Reductionist
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Individual differences

A

Looks at why people fall out of the normal range
Looks at why people differ and how
Develop understanding of disorders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Strengths and weaknesses

A

S- looks at all normal and abnormal behaviours
-treatment of abnormalities

W- socially sensitive
-hard to generalise from unique samples

19
Q

Studies in individual differences

A

Freud - phobias
Gould - intelligence and mental ages
Baron-cohen - autism, Tourette’s and normal Theory of mind
Hancock - psychopaths

20
Q

Individual differences points for comparison

A
Case studies 
Low population validity 
Individual side 
Socially sensitive 
Ecological validity 
Useful
21
Q

Behaviourist perspective

A

Humans are born with a blank slate (tabula rasa) and everything’s learnt after birth
Classical conditioning (learn through association)
Operant conditioning (learn through rewards and punishment)
Social learning theory (learn through observation and imitation)

22
Q

Behaviourist perspective strengths and weaknesses

A

S-nurture

  • useful for child care
  • scientific

W- reductionist - ignores nature

  • hard to apply to adults
  • low ecological validity
23
Q

Studies in behaviourist perspective

A

Bandura - social learning theory influence of observing aggressive model
Chaney - operant conditioning rewards of funhaler

24
Q

Behaviourist perspective comparison points

A
Controlled lab experiments 
Useful
Children
Nurture
Useful
Scientific
25
Q

Psychodynamic perspective

A

3 levels of consciousness - conscious mind (personality) pre conscious (distant memories) unconscious (hidden desires)
3 parts of the personality - Id ego superego
Revealing unconscious mind - Freudian slips, dream analysis, free association, projective tests

26
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of psychodynamic

A

S- mental disorders as result of unconscious

  • suggestions for treatments
  • case study method = detail

W- unscientific
-small samples means low population validity

27
Q

Studies in psychodynamic

A

Freud - unconscious as explanation of phobias and fantasies

Hancock - language of psychopaths comes from unconscious, drives and ego defence mechanisms

28
Q

Points for comparison for psychodynamic

A
Case study methods 
Low internal reliability 
Low Population validity 
Unscientific 
Free will - determinism 
Nature
29
Q

Nature / nurture

A

Nature - behaviour due to genetics e.g. sperry moray

Nurture - behaviour due to upbringing and experiences e.g. Bandura blakemore and Cooper

30
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of nature / nurture

A

Nature
S- useful for genetic modification, not ethnocentric
W- limited usefulness cant change genetics, socially sensitive

Nurture
S- useful
W- socially sensitive, ethnocentric, blame environment, reductionist

31
Q

Reductionism / holism

A

Reductionism - behaviour explained by 1 factor e.g. milgram maguire

Holism - behaviour explained by multiple factors e.g. lee Levine

32
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of reductionism / holism

A

Reductionism
S- find cause and effect, scientific, replicable
W- human behaviour too complex to reduce down, low ecological validity

Holism
S- more complete overview of behaviour
W- turns reductionist in finding most important factor

33
Q

Psychology as a science

A

Replicability, objectivity, falsifiability to be a science
Is - piliavin, milgram
Not - Freud

34
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of psych as a science

A

S- less vulnerable to researcher bias, cause and effect, increases psychology reputation and credibility

W- lacks qualitative data, reductionist, low ecological validity

35
Q

Socially sensitive research

A

Topics which may have negative effects on sample or target population and that can cause upset
Is - Gould
Not - cognitive area

36
Q

Usefulness debate

A

Whether the findings have practical applications
Is - Bandura loftus and Palmer
Isn’t - blakemore and Cooper

37
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of usefulness

A

S- Positive applications to improve people’s lives

  • improve reputation of psychology
  • increases fundings for research

W- can be put to bad uses

  • ethical guidelines broken to make findings useful
  • could cancel out if two people have the same idea on different sides
38
Q

Ethical considerations

A

Strict guidelines over how participants should be treated
Respect - consent, withdraw, confidentiality
Competence - done by someone with official skills - qualified
Integrity - deception
Responsibility - protection from harm, debrief

E.g is Chaney
Isn’t piliavin

39
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of ethics

A

S-increases credibility of psychology
- more likely to get more participants next time

W- limits research being carried out

  • reduce validity if know aim - demand characteristics
  • withdraw may create a weak sample
40
Q

Free will / determinism

A

Free will - choice over our own actions
E.g. milgram

Determinism - caused by external factors (biological = genetics, environmental = upbringing/ social factors)
E.g. Bandura
Maguire

41
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of free will determinism

A

Free will
S- not socially sensitive, useful people held accountable
W- unscientific, socially sensitive

Determinism
S- useful can cause behaviours to occur, scientific
W- reductionist, open to negative uses, socially sensitive

42
Q

Individual/ situational

A

Individual - behaviour due to personality, characteristics
E.g. milgram Freud

Situational - people’s behaviour changed in different situations
E.g. Bandura

43
Q

Strengths and weaknesses of individual situational

A

Individual
S- better understanding of behaviour, useful - jobs
W- hard to change people’s behaviour, reductionist

Situational
S- helps understand changing behaviour, alter behaviour
W- socially sensitive, reductionist