Individual Differences Area Flashcards
What are the assumptions of the Individual Differences Area?
Individuals are unique in their personality, thinking and behaviour. The Individual Differences Area focusses on measuring differences and studying abnornmal behaviour and disorders.
What are the key themes within the Individual Differences Area and name the 2 studies within each theme.
- Understanding Disorder → Classic study: Freud’s Little Hans Study, Contemporary study: Baron-Cohen
- Measuring Differences → Classic study: Gould’s review of Yerkes, Contemporary study: Hancock
How are Freud and Baron-Cohen different in their Research Methods?
Freud used a case study, in which he studied Little Hans, a 5 year old boy in great detail in order to gain in depth data about Hans’ phobia of horses, whereas Baron-Cohen used a quasi experiment. Whether somebody is affected by Autism Spectrum Disorder is a naturally occurring independent variable and is therefore not manipulated by the researcher in order to gain data about the Theory of Mind in Autistic adults
How are Freud and Baron-Cohen similar in their Practical Applications?
Both Freud and Baron-Cohen’s research has practical applications. Freud’s study into Little Hans’ phobia of horses may allow the development of psychotherapy to help people with phobias to cope more effectively. Similarly, Baron-Cohen’s research may allow social workers and other professionals to help people with Autism by attempting to improve their Theory of Mind abilities, improving their social skills and quality of life.
How are Freud and Baron-Cohen similar in their Ethics?
Both studies could be seen as unethical. Freud’s study into Little Hans is unethical because Hans was a child and therefore could not give valid informed consent to participating in Freud’s case study. However, as Hans’ father consented on his behalf, we could argue that this is not ethically unsound. Also, we could argue that Hans wasn’t protected from psychological harm as the questions he was asked were not child friendly and may have caused him distress or confusion. Baron-Cohen’s study could also be seen as unethical because the results are socially sensitive, as suggesting that people with Autism lack theory of mind may lead to stigma and discrimination. It could be argued that some people severely effected by Autism may lack the ability to give valid informed consent due to their social impairments.
How are Freud and Baron-Cohen different in their Data Collected?
Freud collected qualitative data whereas Baron-Cohen collected quantitative data. Freud collected qualitative data, which was his interpretations of Little Hans’ behaviour. Baron-Cohen collected quantitative data, which was the score that each participant achieved on the Eyes Task. Therefore, Freud gained more in-depth data, so he could gain insight into the causes and effects of phobias. However, Freud’s data would have been difficult to analyse and subjective, whereas Baron-Cohen’s data would have been objective and easy to analyse, allowing Baron-Cohen to draw more valid conclusions about Theory of Mind in Autistic adults
How are Freud and Baron-Cohen different in their Sample?
Freud used a sample of just one 5 year old boy from Vienna, Austria, who he studied in great depth. On the other hand, Baron-Cohen used a sample of 16 adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder, 50 control adults, and 10 adults with Tourette’s Syndrome. Baron-Cohen’s sample is more representative as it is larger and more diverse, meaning Baron-Cohen’s research is more likely to produce generalisable results.
To what extent does the contemporary study change our understanding of the key theme of understanding disorders?
This contemporary study (Baron-Cohen) shows us that experimental methods can be used to try and achieve a more objective understanding of disorders. Freud only studied one child and the results consisted of his own subjective interpretations of Hans’ behaviour, whereas Baron-Cohen conducted a controlled quasi experiment in which the results consisted of scores on the eyes task, which is much more objective as it is quantitative.
How does understanding disorders link to cultural diversity?
Both studies have low cultural diversity as they only studied the effects of disorders in one country. Baron-Cohen’s study was carried out in the UK and therefore the results can not be generalised to people in other cultures. Similarly, Freud’s research only focused on one culture as the sample consisted of one child from Vienna, Austria.
How does understanding disorders link to social diversity?
Neither of the studies give further information about social diversity.
How does understanding disorders link to individual diversity?
Both studies give us an
understanding of individual
diversity as they explain why behaviour may differ among people. Baron-Cohen’s study was able to identify that people with Autism have a deficit theory of mind, showing that they differ from people without Autism. Similarly, Freud identified that phobias stem from psychosexual development and childhood trauma. This shows that each individual is different as their childhood defines their behaviours.
How are Gould and Hancock similar in their research methods?
Both Gould and Hancock carried out quasi studies. In Gould’s study, the independent variable was the ethnic group and immigration status of the participants, which is a naturally occurring variable, so the researcher could not manipulate it. Similarly, in Hancock’s study, the independent variable was whether the participant was a psychopath or not, which is also naturally occurring and was not manipulated by the researcher. Both studies use quasi studies as it would not be possible to manipulate these variables for the study. However using quasi experiments results in low levels of control over the independent variable
How are Gould and Hancock different in their ethics?
Gould’s study was unethical, whereas Hancock’s study was mostly ethical. Gould’s study was unethical because the IQ tests used were culturally biased and the results of the study were socially sensitive and had political implications. Hancock’s study was ethical as the murderers gave informed consent to the study.
How are Gould and Hancock similar in their practical applications?
Both studies have practical applications. Although biased, Yerkes’ intelligence tests allowed the creation of more modern IQ tests. These tests can be used for example in education to give different levels of support and different teaching styles to student with different IQ levels. Hancock’s study tell us about how psychopaths behave and speak. Understanding psychopathy may allow more effective rehabilitation techniques to be implemented.
How are Gould and Hancock similar in their data collected?
Both studies produced quantitative data. Yerkes’ intelligence tests resulted in quantitative data as the data collected was the scores that the participants received on the army alpha, army beta and spoken individual assessments. Gould also produced quantitative data as the language of the psychopaths was analysed quantitatively. Therefore, both studies could easily compare between groups but could not explain the differences that were measured between ethnicities or psychopaths and non-psychopaths.
How are Gould and Hancock similar and different in their sample?
Both Gould and Hancock used all male samples. Therefore, their results will be androcentric and therefore will not be generalisable to women. Gould used a much larger sample than Hancock. Gould used 1.75 million army recruits for his research, whereas Hancock used 52 male murderers. Therefore, Gould may produce more generalisable results as the sample is more likely to be representative.
To what extent does the contemporary study change our understanding of the key theme of measuring differences?
Hancock’s research suggests that differences can be measured in an unbiased way, by professionals analysing behaviour through the computer systems of WMatrix and DAL
How does responses to people in need link to individual diversity?
Hancock’s study demonstrated that it is possible to measure differences fairly. Hancock’s study allowed behaviours to be studied in depth in order to understand abnormal behaviour
rather than Gould’s focus on typical
intelligence
How does responses to people in need link to social diversity?
Hancock studied 52 male murderers and therefore does not link to social diversity as a whole. However, his study does explain important issues in society and his results could potentially reduce future offending.
How does responses to people in need link to cultural diversity?
Hancock’s study focused on prisoners in Canada and therefore does
not offer further insight into cultural
diversity overall, however it does extend our understanding from America in the classic study but could be improved by investigating the behaviour of individuals in other cultures.
What is the background of Freud?
Hans was a 5 year old boy from Vienna, Austria with a phobia of horses. Freuds theories involve the psychosexual stages and the Oedipus Complex. The psychosexual stages are:
* Oral Stage (Birth – 1 year)
* Anal Stage (1 – 3 years)
* Phallic Stage (3 – 5/6 years)
* Latency Stage (5/6 – Puberty)
* Genital Stage (Puberty – Adulthood
Freud theorised that during the Phallic stage, boys undergo the Oedipus Complex, in which boys have a sexual desire for their mother, and they have castration fear as they are afraid that their father will castrate them if they found out. This leads to boys identifying with their father, therefore gaining masculine traits.
What is the aim of Freud?
Freud aimed to treat and explain Hans’ phobia, and to provide support for his Psychoanalytic theory, especially to provide support for the Oedipus Complex and the Phallic Stage of his stages of psychosexual development.
