external influences on children's behaviour: bandura et al & chaney et al Flashcards
bandura hypotheses?
tested four hypotheses:
exposure to an aggressive model will cause more imitative aggression acts than exposure to a non-aggressive model or no model
exposure to a non-aggressive model will inhibit aggressive behaviour
children will imitate models of the same-sex more than opposite sex
boys will show significantly more aggression than girls
bandura sample?
72 children from stanford university nursery school
37-69 months with mean age of 52 months
bandura method?
lab experiment w/ mpd
bandura ivs?
gender of model
aggression of model
gender of child
bandura dv?
amount and nature of aggression later
bandura conditions?
aggressive male model
aggressive female model
non-aggressive female model
non-aggressive male model
no model (control)
bandura matching ps?
matched on pre-existing aggression, by teacher and experimenter
four 5 point systems: physical aggression, verbal aggression, restraint when angry and aggression towards objects
bandura procedure stages?
modelling
aggression arousal
delayed imitation
bandura phase one?
modelling
child taken to first room, where they sit at a table with stickers and potato prints
on other side, there is a model, with tinker toy, bobo doll and mallet
non-aggressive model ignored bobo and just played with tinker toy, aggressive model
bandura aggressive acts?
4 scripted acts, each repeated three times
lay on bobo, hit nose
throw doll in the air
hit doll on head with mallet
kick doll around the room
bandura aggressive phrases?
pow
throw him in the air
kick him
sock him on the nose
hit him down
bandura non-aggressive phrases?
he keeps coming back for more
he sure is a tough fella
bandura phase two?
after 10 mins, p is leads to the anteroom, which is filled with very attractive toys
after 2 mins, told these special toys were reserved for other children
then lead to room three
bandura phase 3?
test for delayed imitation
toys (including toy gun, bobo doll, mallet, colouring pencils, zoo animals, dolls, tea set, toy cars, suspended ball)
child observed for 20 mins through a one-way mirror by two observers (unaware of condition)
behaviours noted every 5 seconds (240 observations total)
arrive at aggression score using checklist
bandura checklist details?
directly imitative responses: physical and verbal acts
partially imitative responses: hitting other things with the mallet, just sitting on bobo etc
non-imitative responses: slapping bobo, aggression to other objects, novel verbal hostility, aggressive gun play
bandura results?
exposure to an aggressive model did cause more imitative aggressive acts than a non-aggressive model
exposure to a non-aggressive model did not generally inhibit aggressive behaviour, but a male non-aggressive model did
boys showed more aggression when showed a male model, girls showed more physical aggression with a male model but more verbal aggression with a female model
boys showed more physical aggression than girls with a male model but girls showed more verbal aggression than boys with a female model
bandura general conclusions?
children produce behaviours they have observed and generalise them to new situations
supports social learning theory, behaviour can be learned through observation
reinforcement of child or model is needed for learning
bandura gender of model conclusions?
aggression of female model confused children, while aggression of male model was something to be desired
children imitate behaviour they see as culturally acceptable for them
verbal aggression is less gendered, so an available outlet of girls
bandura research method evaluation?
lab expt, good control over extraneous variables
but low ecological validity (adults beating up inflatable clown)
bandura data collected evaluation?
data is quantitative (allows comparison) and qualitative (provides insight into why certain behaviours are imitated)
aggression scores and comments made
bandura ethicality evaluation?
informed consent not given by parents, but my nursery staff (loco parentis), also assent of children not given
children couldn’t withdraw, and were persuaded to continue after being but in a purposefully provoking situation
children could’ve been made permanently more aggressive
bandura validity evaluation?
lacks ecological validity due to unusual scenario
bobo doll is designed to be attacked, so more acceptable
only considers short term effects
bandura sampling bias?
while 72 sounds big, the various conditions mean that only 6 are in each experimental group
results could be influenced by unmatched participant variables
generalisability issues due to all ps being from same nursery
bandura link to theme?
demonstrates how external influences (such as siblings, parents, celebrity role models) could have a negative impact on a child’s behaviour if they act in an aggressive way
the study proves that socialisation and social learning is an external influence that affects children’s behaviour
bandura link to area?
assumption: behavioural development is the result of an interaction between nature and nurture
bandura shows the interaction between nurture and a child’s behaviour, social learning lead children who observed an aggressive model to acting aggressively
chaney method?
field expt with rmd
chaney dv?
level of adherence, measured by questionnaires and random phone call interviews
chaney sample?
32 children from clinics across perth, australia
random sample of those prescribed pMDI and spacer
1.5-6 yrs, mean 3.2
asthma for mean of 2.2 years
chaney procedure?
parents (w/ informed consent) completed a questionnaire
questioned about current asthma device in use (either AeroChamber or Breath-a-tech), asked about ease of use, adherence and attitudes towards treatment
then given funhaler to use with child, which had a whistle and spinning disc that were activated when it was used correctly, using operant conditioning to self-reinforce the behaviour
over the period, random phone calls were made to see if treatment was successful the day before and after two weeks, there was another questionnaire
chaney results?
random calls found that 22/27 had been successful the day before, compared to 16/27 when using the funhaler
22/30 reported they were ‘always’ successful using the funhaler, compared to 3/30 for the regular spacer
60% more children took their recommended 4 or more cycles per ‘puff’ with the standard spacer compared to the standard spacer
chaney conclusions?
positive reinforcement from funhaler increased compliance and effectiveness of medication for young asthmatics
functional incentive devices like the funhaler could improve the general health of children
more research needed to go into long term effects
chaney method evaluation?
field experiment so low control of extraneous variables, all ps experience different things
however, standardised questionnaires and instructions
chaney method evaluation?
field experiment so low control of extraneous variables, all ps experience different things
however, standardised questionnaires and instructions
chaney data collected evaluation?
quantitative, closed questions provided easily comparable data
no qualitative data, lack of understanding of why funhaler had better compliance
chaney ethicality evaluation?
informed consent from parents with no deceit
no harm, psychological or physiological
right to withdraw
full debrief
chaney validity evaluation?
ecological validity high due to field nature
funhaler could just be novel and exciting, meaning the effects would wear off
also, use of self-report means that demand characteristics are an issue
chaney sampling bias evaluation?
random sampling eliminates experimenter bias
range of cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, but representation not guaranteed
chaney link to theme?
links to theme of external influences on children’s behaviour as it uses operant conditioning (reinforcement and punishment) to improve children’s adherence to medical guidance
chaney link to area?
assumption: behavioural development is the result of an interaction between nature and nurture
showed how operant conditioning could be used to successfully changing a child’s behaviour, showing the importance or nurture
bandura and chaney similarities?
both use behaviourist theories as the basis of their experiments, bandura using slt and chaney using operant conditioning
both use children as their ps, bandura 37-69 months and chaney 1.5-6 years
bandura and chaney differences?
bandura is a lab expt and chaney is a field expt
bandura uses observation and chaney uses self-report
chaney changing understanding of external influences on children’s behaviour?
provides a practical means to positively change a child’s behaviour
