HASSETT Flashcards
BACKGROUND
Hassett et al. (2008) were interested in research into congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH). For example, XX girls with CAH prefer stereotypically masculine toys, even when encouraged to play with stereotypically feminine toys.
Previous monkey research found that masculine toys were played with more by male than by female monkeys; likewise, female monkeys showed a strong preference for feminine over masculine toys.
As monkeys are not affected by societal expectations about gender-appropriate behaviour, Hassett et al. believed sex differences in toy preferences are determined by nature more than nurture.
PSYCH BEING INVESTIGATED
AIM
To test if sex differences in children’s toy preferences are due to biological factors (i.e. exposure to high levels of prenatal androgen) rather than socialisation.
To investigate whether male and female rhesus monkeys have similar toy preferences to human children despite having no experience socialising with human toys.
SAMPLE
135 juvenile and adult monkeys; 14 excluded (previous participation in hormone research); 39 infants excluded (looked too alike to accurately record sex).
34 included in data, 23 females, 11 males
Sampling Technique: Opportunity Sampling
- field experiment w/ controlled observation
- independent measures design
PROCEDURE
IV: Monkey Male or Female
DV:Frequency and Duration of play with a plush toy or a wheeled toy
Quantitative data: duration of toy interactions (in seconds)– specific behaviours using a behavioural checklist (e.g. holding, dragging).
Trials: Seven 25 minute trials, one trial finished early when toy destroyed.
Controls: Monkeys were kept indoors while toys were positioned. Toys were placed 10 m apart. Toy positions were counterbalanced – that is, whether wheeled/plush toys were on the right/left side of the enclosure.
RESULTS
73% of the males preferred wheeled toys, 9% preferred plush toys and 18% showed no significant preference.
30% of females preferred the plush toys, 39% preferred the wheeled toys and 30% showed no significant preference for either toy.
The data from the monkey observations were compared with data from a similar study using children. Both sets of results show that males significantly prefer masculine to feminine toys and, although there is a difference in the preference of females for feminine toys, this is far less pronounced, especially in the monkeys
CONCLUSION
Sex-typed preferences in humans may be due to biological differences because even without differences in socialisation, monkeys showed preferences similar to human infants.
Male monkeys similar to boys, have a strong preference for masculine-type toys. Whereas, female monkeys are more variable in their toy preferences. Toy preferences reflect behavioural and cognitive biases which have been influenced by hormones.
GRAVE
:) Reliability – the well-operationalised behavioural checklist meant behaviours were consistently coded in the same way. :) Validity – use of unobtrusive video cameras meant that behaviour was likely to be more spontaneous and unaffected by human presence. :(However, using only two toys per trial- if one monkey occupied the wheeled toy, another monkey would only have access to plush- may not be their preference :( Objectivity – the researchers who analysed the videotapes were very familiar with the monkeys, which could lead to observer bias.:( Generalisations – Eight of the 11 male monkeys were juveniles, and the only high-ranking male in the troop did not interact with any of the toys.
Hassett Strengths:
Controlled Experimental Design with Counterbalancing – The study made a meticulous effort to counterbalance the placement of ‘wheeled’
and ‘plush’ toys 10 meters apart outdoors before each of the seven 25-minute trials. This control for location bias greatly enhances the internal validity of the study, increasing our confidence that the variations in toy interactions are due to genuine preferences rather than arbitrary spatial positioning.
Strict Adherence to Ethical Guidelines – Hassett et al. strictly adhered to the guidelines set by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and obtained approval from Emory’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. This ethical oversight ensures that the welfare of the rhesus monkeys was prioritised and lends further legitimacy to the study.
Inter-Observer Reliability – The study employed two observers to code the behaviours of the monkeys as they interacted with the toys. This collaborative approach reduced the risk of observer bias and meant that data could be checked for reliability. Both observers used Handobs, a program designed for entering time-stamped behavioural information, ensuring that the coding process was standardised and replicable for reliability.
Hassett Weaknesses
Environmental Factors – The environment in which the monkeys were raised and tested (e.g., a laboratory or controlled setting) might not accurately reflect natural living conditions. This aspect can influence their behavior and interaction with the toys, affecting the study’s relevance to natural toy preferences.
Limited Toy Categories (Wheeled and Plush) – The researchers restricted their focus to just two types of toys, categorised as ‘wheeled’ and ‘plush,’ to represent masculine and feminine toys. This choice limits the generalisability of the findings. For instance, it remains unclear how these monkeys might interact with toys that don’t neatly fit into these categories.
Potential Observer Bias – Although two observers worked collaboratively to code behavioural interactions there’s still a possibility for observer bias. The act of coding specific behaviours is inherently subjective and could be influenced by the observers’ own perceptions or beliefs, thus affecting the reliability of the data.
APP. TO EVERYDAY LIFE
NATURE VS NURTURE
Issues and Debates: Nature vs Nurture: The findings support nature over nurture. Differences in toy preference result from hormonal differences between the sexes. Toy preferences were also affected by social rank. Role within the group also affected time spent interacting with toys. Sex was not the only important factor
INDIVIDUAL VS SITUATIONAL
CHILDREN & ANIMAL IN RESEARCH
Children and animals in research: Conclusions from animals were extrapolated to children. Using animals allowed control of environment.
ETHICS
