issues and debates ao3

Question 1

Idiograthic evaluation

Answer 1

+ In-depth qualitative data, provides a complete global account of a person
+ Case study method, used for generating hypotheses for further study such as HM
– Narrow and restricted nature, can’t make generalisations without further examples, Freud Little Hans
– Methods associated with this approach tend to be less scientific, conclusions often rely on subjective interpretation

Question 2

Nomothetic evaluation

Answer 2

+ Processes involved tend to be more scientific, standardised conditions, statistical testing
+ These processes have enables psychologists to establish norms of ‘typical’ behaviour, giving psychology scientific credibility
– Focus on general laws, prediction and control is ‘loosing the whole person’ within psychology
–Richness of human experience is overlooked, ignores how subjective experience can affect results

Question 3

Free will evaluation

Answer 3

+ Everyday experience suggests free will, face validity
+ Better for our mental health to believe in free will, Roberts et al. research suggests that internals tend to be more mentally healthy, externals have a higher risk of depression
– Brain scan button study

Question 4

Determinism evaluation

Answer 4

+ More consistent with aims of science, places psychology on equal footing with other sciences
+ Prediction and control has led to development of treatments e.g. drugs for schizophrenia
+ Mental illness is determined, no one chooses to have mental illness
– Isn’t consistent with the legal system, offender held morally accountable
– Unfalsifiable, says that causes of behaviour will always exist even though it may not yet have been found, this is impossible to prove wrong

Question 5

Ethical implication evaluation

Answer 5

+ Starr argues that there are benefits, can lead to greater sensitivity and understanding of underrepresented groups, reducing prejudice
– Framing of the question and way of investigation can influence findings, investigators have to go into research with an ‘open mind’ to avoid misrepresenting minority groups
– Can be manipulated by government or other institutions to shape public policy, Burt 11+ and Coca Cola subliminal messaging, issue of who benefits
– Can be seen as giving scientific credence to prejudice and discrimination, e.g. 1920s and 30s in US compulsory sterilisation of ‘feeble minded’ backed up by the scientific and psychological community