Evaluate Points Main study

Question 1

What are the evaluative points of Raine et al.

Answer 1

Alt Evidence: Raine and Yang

Methodology:
Strength: Lab experiment
Weakness: Quasi

Procedure
Strength: Uses PET scans
Weakness: Lacks ecological validity

Ethics:
Weakness: PP harm (2 weeks no meds)
Weakness: Lack of valid consent (can ngri truly consent)

Social Implications:
Strength: Could lead to crime reduction (charles Whitman)
Weakness: Social Sensitive research

Question 2

What are the evaluative points of Bowlby

Answer 2

Methodology:
Strength: use of case studies
Weakness: lacks generalisability

Procedures:
weakness: relies on parent recollection
weakness: lack of cause and effect

Ethics:
Weakness: Lack of confidentiality
Weakness: Lack of valid consent

Social implication
Strength: Highlighted importance of childcare (Family and Childcare Trust)
Weakness: Changes to maternity+ leave

Question 3

What are the evaluative points of Watson and Rayner?

Answer 3

Methodology
Strength: Use of Lab experiment
Weakness: Only one participant

Procedures
Strength: Baseline variable
Weakness: Procedures not fully completed

Ethics
Weakness: Lack of valid consent
Weakness: Severe BPS guideline breach

Social Implications:
Strength: Shows how conditioning techniques may be useful for children (McAlister)
Weakness: Shows how conditioning techniques are NOT useful for children (Lepper)

Question 4

Evaluate points of Loftus and Palmer.

Answer 4

Methodology:
Strength: Lab experiment ensures control
Weakness: Generalisability (Schacter et al)

Procedures:
Strength: High control over extraneous Variables / researcher bias
Weakness: Lacks ecological Validity (foster et al)

Ethics:
Strength: BPS guidelines
Weakness: Valid consent / Deception

Social implications:
Strength: Application (cog interviews)
Strength: minimises wrongful imprisonment

Question 5

What are the evaluate points of the Myers and Diener?

Answer 5

Methodology / Procedures:
Weaknesses: Self Report. Lit review, Correlations, Ungeneralizable.

Ethics:
Strength: No risk of psychological Harm
Weakness: BPS guidelines (questions abt R status and happiness could be distressing)

Social implication:

Weakness: socially sensitive research