Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Healthy living > Flashcards

Healthy living Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What approach does Abrahams’ study support?

A

The cognitive approach

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

How does Abrahams’ study support the cognitive approach?

A

Because it shows how people follow the health belief model by undergoing evaluative cognitions about changing their behaviour

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

What are the 4 sections of the health belief model and explain each one.

A

Perception of threat: Perceived seriousness of the issue
Cost benefit analysis: An analysis that weighs the pros and cons
Demographic variables: Social factors- Class, age, social norms
Cues for action: Physical symptoms, personal experience, internal cues.

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

Who created the HBM?

A

Becker and Rosenstock

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

What was the aim of Abrahams’ study?

A

To investigate the attitudes of condom use in the context of AIDS

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

Who were the participants in Abrahams’ study?

A

318 university students from Dundee in Scotland. Volunteer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What was the method of Abrahams’ study?

A

Questionnaire, self report method

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

What was the response rate in Abrahams’ study?

A

53%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What was the procedure in Abrahams’ study?

A

To get university students to complete a questionnaire that addresses attitudes towards AIDS and condoms. Some of it consisted of Likert scales about: condom effectiveness, condom attractiveness and condom offensiveness.

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

What were the results in Abrahams’ study?

A

Perceived seriousness of HIV didn’t affect behaviour so there was more cost than benefit.
Condoms were considered effective, offensive and unattractive.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What did Abrahams conclude from his study?

A

That the research supports the HBM in terms of cost benefit analysis

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

Evaluate Abrahams’ study. 4 things.

A

Holistic as it looks at cognitions as well as social factors
The study supports the HBM
Not generalisable
Bad response rate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What approach does Rotter’s study support?

A

The cognitive approach

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

How does Rotter’s study support the cognitive approach?

A

Because it shows how certain cognitions: blaming behaviour on internal or external causes can be linked to certain behaviour.

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

What is the context of Rotter’s study?

A

Rotter created a questionnaire that showed what locus of control you had, internal or external. Someone with an internal locus of control believes that the cause of their behaviour is themselves whereas someone with an external locus believes that behaviour is down to luck and other people.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the aim of Rotter’s study?

A

To investigate correlations between locus of control and behaviour

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

What was the procedure of Rotter’s study?

A

The procedure was to look at secondary data to see the results of people who had completed the locus of control questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of pairs of statements and you pick the one that applies to you. There was 6 filler statements to disguise the aim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What were the results of Rotter’s study?

A

The secondary data showed that there was correlations between locus of control and gambling, smoking and persuasion behaviours. Externals were more likely to gamble and take risks, they weren’t as good at persuasion and they were more likely to smoke.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What did Rotter conclude from his study?

A

That internals can gain information and have the initiative to change their own lives. They can also resist manipulation and lead healthier lives.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Evaluate Rotter’s study. 4 things

A
  1. Reliable as it was repeated many times and got the ame results
  2. Holistic as it includes behaviour as well as cognitions
  3. It’s useful for CBT treatments
  4. People can be both internal and external so it’s quite deterministic.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What approach does Bandura’s study support?

A

The cognitive approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How does Bandura’s study support the cognitive approach?

A

Because it shows that if one believes in themselves and has positive cognitions then they are more like to overcome the particular obstacle.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What is the context of Bandura’s study?

A

Self efficacy is when one believes in themselves and there are 4 variables that influence it. The variables: Vicarious influences (comparing yourself to others), persuasive influences (positive feedback), enactive influences (past experiences) and emotive influences (anxiety etc.).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the aim of Bandura’s study?

A

To assess the self efficacy of patients doing systematic desensitisation for snake phobias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What was the method of Bandura’s study?

A

Quasi as the participants already had the snake phobia

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Who were the participants in Bandura’s study?

A

10 volunteer participants who had a snake phobia. They were recruited via advertisement and there was 9 females and 1 male.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What was the procedure of Bandura’s study?

A

The participants took part in relaxation and desensitisation exercises but before and after this, their self efficacy and fear was measured.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What were the results of Bandura’s study?

A

Self efficacy was correlated with higher levels of interaction with the snake

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What did Bandura conclude?

A

That desensitisation enhanced self efficacy which then enhanced their ability to handle the snake.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Evaluate Bandura’s study. 4 things.

A
  1. Holistic as it looks at cognition and behaviour
  2. Deterministic as it ignores individual differences
  3. Ignores cultural factors
  4. It ignores non-rational explanations, e.g. optimism or phobias.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What is the context of Cowpe’s study?

A

That media campaigns are widely used to try and change health behaviours but their effectiveness is limited. Whelan and Culver’s study showed that attitude change doesn’t always lead to behavioural change

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is the aim of Cowpe’s study?

A

To test the effectiveness of media campaigns that are aimed to reduce chip pan fires

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What is the method of Cowpe’s study?

A

Quasi experiment

34
Q

What was the procedure of Cowpe’s study?

A

The procedure was to show an advertisement to ten UK regions about what causes chip pan fires and how to put them out. After this Cowpe measured two variables: incidence of chip pan fires reported and quantitative consumer attitude surbeys. The commercials were 60 seconds long.

35
Q

Who were the participants in Cowpe’s study?

A

The whole population of the ten UK regions and the sample that completed the survey

36
Q

What were the results of Cowpe’s study? 4 things

A

There was a 12% reduction in chip pan fires
The reduction was highest immediately after screening but then levelled off as people became desensitised to the advert
Repeated viewing reduced the effectiveness
The surveys showed that there was an increased awareness from 62% to 96%.

37
Q

What did Cowpe conclude from his study?

A

He concluded that media campaigns can be effective in increasing awareness and changing behaviour and they’re most effective when they’re informative.

38
Q

Evaluate Cowpe’s study. 3 things.

A

You can’t infer cause and effect because the study doesn’t account for confounding variables
Only from the UK so not representative
Reliable- quantitative

39
Q

What is the context of Dannenberg’s study?

A

Legislation is an effective way to change health behaviours. For example when smoking was banned in public places, it reduced the amount of second hand smoke and therefore changed unhealthy behaviours (smoking in public) to healthier ones.

40
Q

What is the aim of Dannenberg’s study?

A

To assess the impact of legislation of wearing helmets whilst riding a bike.

41
Q

What was the method of Dannenberg’s study?

A

Quasi self report questionnaire

42
Q

Who were the participants in Dannenberg’s study?

A

7,332 children that were either: 9-10, 12-13 or 14-15 years old. They were from Maryland USA and they either lived in: Howard county, Montgomery or Baltimore.

43
Q

What was the response rate in Dannenberg’s study?

A

48%

44
Q

In Dannenberg’s study, describe details about each county

A

Howard: Legislation
Montgomery: No legislation but educational campaign
Baltimore: Now law, no campaign

45
Q

What was the procedure of Dannenberg’s study?

A

The questionnaire was sent via post and the participants were anonymous. The parents helped the children with the questionnaire and it asked the children to compare their helmet use with that of the year before.

46
Q

What were the results of Dannenberg’s study? 2 things

A

Helmet use rose by 27% in Howard county and by 5 and 4% in the other two counties
A clear majority didn’t wear a helmet

47
Q

What did Dannenberg conclude?

A

He concluded that legislation is effective but campaigns had no significant effect.

48
Q

Evaluate Dannenberg’s study. 5 things

A

The counties had similar socio-economic class which isolated the variable meaning there was more control. Also there was 2 counties without the law, increasing control further
Demand characteristics because it is illegal not to wear a helmet
Ethical because parents gave consent and the results were confidential.
Not valid because they didn’t account for total cycle use, it may have dramatically decreased after the legislation. This would increase the proportion of people wearing helmet.
Reliable because of quantitative data and because repeated studies got similar results

49
Q

What is the context of Janis and Feshback’s study?

A

That there was a previous study completed about the effectiveness of fear arousal on changing health behaviour. The study was by Lashley and Watson and it looked at the impact of a video about veneral disease. It had a lot of fear arousal and the study showed that it changed attitude but not behaviour

50
Q

What is the aim of Janis and Feshback’s study?

A

To study motivational effects of fear arousal in health promotion communications

51
Q

Who were the participants in Janis and Feashback’s study?

A

A freshman class from a high school in Connecticut. About 15 years old

52
Q

What was the procedure of Janis and Feshback’s study?

A

The participants were split into 4 groups: Strong fear, moderate fear, minimal fear and control. 3 groups were then shown a 15 minute lecture on tooth decay. The control group didn’t participate in a lecture. The participants were given a questionnaire a week before, immediately after and one week after the study.

53
Q

What were the results of Janis and Feshback’s study? 3 things.

A

Strong fear had high anxiety towards tooth decay immediately after the lecture
The strong fear group rated the information more positively than the other groups did
The minimal fear group were most likely to change their behaviour and strong fear were least likely to. 36% compared to 8%.

54
Q

What did Janis and Feshback conclude from their study?

A

When the health promotion contains high levels of fear that isn’t relieved via reassurance then the audience will ignore the threat

55
Q

Evaluate Janis and Feshback’s study. 3 things.

A
  1. Not generalisable
  2. It is useful in showing how to promote health most effectively
  3. Not valid because people may have lied about behavioural change to be socially desirable
56
Q

What does Bulpit’s study support? (Not an approach)

A

The health belief model

57
Q

What is the context of Bulpit’s study?

A

Many people don’t adhere for a variety of reasons. The HBM comes into play with adherence because the patient may not perceive any threat and therefore not adhere or there may be more cost than benefit due to the side effects of treatment.

58
Q

What is the aim of Bulpit’s study?

A

To review research on adherence in hypertensive patients

59
Q

What was the method of Bulpit’s study?

A

Review article on research into the side effects of hypertensive treatments

60
Q

What was the procedure of Bulpit’s study?

A

Bulpit analysed the research to identify physical and psychological effects of hypertensive drug treatments.

61
Q

What were the results of Bulpit’s study?

A

There was many side effects of hypertensive treatment like sleepiness, dizziness, lack of sexual functioning and effects on cognitive functioning

62
Q

What did Bulpit conclude?

A

When the costs of treatment outweighs the benefit then there is a reduced chance of adherence

63
Q

Evaluate Bulpit’s study. 4 things.

A

It is reliable as many studies were analysed
You can’t infer cause and effect because the data is secondary
It was androcentric as the participants were male
There was no control over confounding and extraneous variables

64
Q

What approach does Lustman’s study support?

A

The biological approach

65
Q

How does Lustman’s study support the biological approach?

A

Because it shows that biological treatments can reduce the symptoms of depression which in turn increases adherence to other treatments

66
Q

What is the context of Lustman’s study?

A

That adherence is really hard to measure as people lie and say they adhere to be socially desirable so the best way to measure adherence is biologically like looking at urine samples. In this case, Lustman monitored the patients’ GHb levels. Ghb levels are glycohaemoglobin levels, aka blood sugar levels

67
Q

What is the aim of Lustman’s study?

A

To assess the efficacy of fluoxetine (an antidepressant) in treating depression by measuring blood sugar levels

68
Q

Who were the participants in Lustman’s study?

A

60 volunteers. The patients had both depression and diabetes and Lustman assumed that they wouldn’t adhere to diabetic treatment because of their depression. They had no other previous or present mental health conditions

69
Q

What was the procedure of Lustman’s study?

A

There were 2 groups: Fluoxetine and placebo. The participants were randomly assigned to one of these and it was double blind. They were given daily doses of fluoxetine over 8 weeks. Their depression was assessed via psychometric tests and their GHb levels were monitored to test for their adherence. Lustman believed that if the patients weren’t depressed then they would adhere to their diabetic treatment

70
Q

What were the results of Lustman’s study?

A

The patients who received fluoxetine had lower levels of depression and normal levels of GHb showing adherence.

71
Q

What did Lustman conclude?

A

Greater adherence to diabetic treatment was shown from patients who took fluoxetine

72
Q

Evaluate Lustman’s study. 3 things

A

No demand characteristics as it was double blind
Can’t infer cause and effect because Lustman didn’t control other variables, there may be other reasons why the patients had normal GHb levels.
Reliable as it used scientific methods to conduct research

73
Q

What approach does Watt’s study support?

A

The behaviourist approach

74
Q

How does Watt’s study support the behaviourist perspective?

A

Because it shows that reinforcing behaviour via operant conditioning can improve adherence to medical regimes.

75
Q

What is the context of Watt’s study?

A

Many factors can increase adherence to medical regimes, for example verbal commitment increases adherence and therapy has more adherence as it is an appointment, not a drug. One way that adherence can be increased is by making the medical regime a positive experience.

76
Q

What is the aim of Watt’s study?

A

To see if using a Funhaler can improve adherence to asthmatic medication

77
Q

What is the method and design of Watt’s study?

A

Field experiment/self report

Repeated measures- 1 week using the Funhaler, 1 week using a standard inhaler

78
Q

Who were the participants in Watt’s study?

A

32 asthmatic Australian children whose parents had given full informed consent.

79
Q

Describe the Funhaler

A

The Funhaler is an inhaler that has toys/fun noises to entertain the children. The noises play when the inhaler is used

80
Q

What is the procedure of Watt’s study?

A

The procedure was to get the parents to complete a questionnaire about the adherence to the inhalers

81
Q

What were the results of Watt’s study?

A

38% of parents said the child had adhered to the Funhaler the previous day
The Funhaler improved adherence because of the reinforcement

82
Q

Evaluate Watt’s study. 4 things

A

The findings were based on one day so they weren’t valid
Reliable due quantitative data
Parents could have acted under demand characteristics when completing the questionnaire
Repeated measures means there could have been order effects

Psychology (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions