Developmental; Bandura, Kohlburg, Chaney, Lee

Question 1

Bandura - What is the aim/Background of the study?

Answer 1

.Investigate social learning theory to see if social behaviours, can be acquired by observation and imitation.

Question 2

Bandura - What is the Sample of the study?

Answer 2

36 boys / 36 girls aged 3 - 6 ,Stanford uni nursery

Question 3

Bandura - What did the pre test consist off?

Answer 3

.Pre tested Children on how aggressive they were then on a 5 point rating scale, this was then used for matched paired designs.

Question 4

Bandura - What was the procedure of the study?

Answer 4

.Aggressive model, Non aggressive model, and No model (control) shown to 24 children each for 10 mins.
.Agression Arousal 2 mins
.Next room contained aggressive and non aggressive toys, the child was in the room for 20 mins and their behaviour was observed through a one way mirror

Question 5

Bandura - What aggressive behaviours and non aggressive behaviours did the models do?

Answer 5

Agressive -
.Attacked Bo Bo toll, used hammers in some cases and others threw the doll and shouted “Pow, Boom”

Non Agressive -
.Played in a quite and subdued manner ignoring the Bo Bo doll.

Question 6

Bandura - What was the 2 min aggression arousal?

Answer 6

.Individual Child separately taken to room with good toys.

.After 2 mins told they were the very best toys and were reserved for the other children.

Question 7

Bandura - What were the results of the study?

Answer 7

.Children who observed aggressive model were far more aggressive
.Children who observed non aggressive model were far less aggressive
.Boys showed more aggressive Physical acts
.Boys followed same sex model more

Question 8

Bandura - Evaluation?

Answer 8

+ Standardised replicable procedure.

_ Low ecological validity as it is not a natural event

Question 9

Kohlberg - What is the aim/Background of the study?

Answer 9

Aimed to test Kohlebergs theory of moral development

Question 10

Kohlberg - What is the sample of the study?

Answer 10

72 Chicago boys aged 10 - 16 years old, 58 followed up at three yearly intervals for the longitudinal study.

Question 11

Kohlberg - What is the Heinz Dilemma?

Answer 11

.Heinz wife dying, however drug she needs he can’t afford, he tries to raise money but can only raise half and chemist won’t budge.
.Heinz was desperate so later broke into the chemist and stole the drug.

Question 12

Kohlberg - What was the procedure?

Answer 12

.Told Participants the story
.Each boy given 2 hour interview on 10 dilemmas, (mainly interested in why they chose their answers)
.Interpreted answers using 6 stages of moral development.

Question 13

Kohlberg - What is the 1st level of moral development?

Answer 13

Pre conventional morality -
.Reasoning based on physical consequences of actions
Stage 1 - Obedience and punishment orientation
.Punishment indicated wrong doing
Stage 2 - Individualism and Exchange
.Understand different individuals have different viewpoints.

Question 14

Kohlberg - What is the 2nd level of moral development?

Answer 14

Conventional morality -
.Based on norms of the group
Stage 3 - Good interpersonal relationships
.Acts Good to be seen as good by others
Stage 4 - Maintaining the social order
.Obeying the law and rules to avoid guilt

Question 15

Kohlberg - What is the 3rd level of moral development?

Answer 15

Post Conventional Morality -
.Based on self chosen principle,s individual rights and justice.
Stage 5 - Social Contract and individual rights
.Understand rules can sometimes harm individuals
Stage 6 - Universal principles
.Develop their own sets of moral guidelines eg human rights.

Question 16

Kohlberg - Evaluation?

Answer 16

+ longitudinal study

• All male biased sample
• Low ecological validity

Question 17

Chaney - What is the aim/Background of the study?

Answer 17

Test operant conditioning / positive reinforcement in regards to a novelty asthma inhaler for children

Question 18

Chaney - What is the sample of the study?

Answer 18

32 children with asthma aged 1.5 - 6 years old (22M/10F)

Question 19

Chaney - What is the Procedure of the study?

Answer 19

1. Participants interviewed with questionnaire at home on their existing use of the standard inhaler.
2. The given Funhaler for 2 weeks, would report over the phone on an ad hoc bases whether they had used the Funhaler the previous day.
3. After 2 weeks, parents at home, interviewed and completed matched questionnaire

Question 20

Chaney - What differences where there in the funhaler?

Answer 20

.Deep breathing (good behaviour) activates the toys

.Toys can be switched out to avoid boredom

Question 21

Chaney - What are the results of the study?

Answer 21

.Ad Hof calls 22/27 Funhaler had medicated child previous day compared to 16/27 standard
.Children who took recommended dose 24/30 Funhaler compared to standard 15/30 standard
.Always successful in medicating the child 22/30 Funhaler compared to 3/30 standard
.

Question 22

Chaney - evaluation?

Answer 22

• Demand Characteristics
• Small sample not generalisable
  + Useful
  + Ecological validity

Question 23

Lee - What is the aim/Background of the study?

Answer 23

.To Test the difference in cultures (Canada / China) when looking at truth telling/ lie telling in pro social and anti social situations.

Question 24

Lee - What is the Sample of the study?

Answer 24

.120 Chinese / 108 Canadians (equal genders) \

.Consisted of ages 7,9 and 11

Question 25

Lee - What where the conditions of the study?

Answer 25

.Ethnicity of the child (Chinese / Canadian)
.Age (7,9,11)
.Story (social or physical)
.Pro Social or anti Social settings

Question 26

Lee - What where the different story settings in the study?

Answer 26

.Pro Social / Truth Telling /Physical and social
.Pro Social / Lie Telling /Physical and social
.Anti Social / Truth Telling /Physical and social
.Anti Social / Lie Telling /Physical and social

Question 27

Lee - What where the different between physical and social stories in the study?

Answer 27

Physical = some sort of physical act 
Social = someone either gets hurt or helped

Question 28

Lee - What was the method of the study?

Answer 28

.Children in each group randomly allocated to physical or social story.
.Seen individually and asked questions; 1. if the act was right or wrong and 2. if the act of (lying/ truth telling) is good or naughty.
.went through all stories, with the options for good / naughty being changed to avoid them chasing the first one.
.Children gave scores for two good or bad the deed was, high score = approval low score = disapproval

Question 29

Lee - What where the results of the study?

Answer 29

.Question 1 - every good deed had a positive score and every bad deed had a negative score.
.Question 2 -
.Older Chinese children began to see truth telling in positive story as negative also didn’t rate lying in pro social situations as bad
.Canadian children disapproved of lie telling every time
. Concluded there was a socio cultural element to morality

Question 30

Lee - Evaluation?

Answer 30

+ Not ethnocentric as multiple cultures
+ adhered to ethical guidelines
+ Reliable standardise procedure
- Low ecological validity