Issues and debates evaluations Flashcards
Gender bias
2+,2-
+adopting a beta bias approach helps create equality as suggests there’s no difference between male and females. This allows women more access to educational and occupational opportunities
+considering gender bias allows researchers to be aware of how their assumptions can influence the research. Researchers use a reflective process in qualitative research where they consider the affect of their own values. Researchers less likely to make concrete generalisations on gender
- Not beneficial to treat males and females the same as there are differences eg. Hare-Mustin and Marecek suggests viewing genders as equal takes attention away from womens needs. Eg. equal parent leave ignores demands of pregnancy
- methodological issues eg. differences may not be due to gender, could be due to researcher. eg. Rosenthal found male and female researhers obtain different data from pps due to the way they treat them. Male researchers are more pleasant and encouraging to female pps, leading to males performing worse. Difficult to get true reflection and hard to know if gender bias is occurring
Cultural bias
1+,3-
+researchers overcoming cultural bias by using ethnography- researcher becomes part of community to fully understand culture, producing valid results
-impact on diagnosis of mental health. eg. DSM based on western culture, schizophrenia symptom= hearing voices. In some cultures hearing voices is normal so people may receive treatment when they don’t need it
-not all behaviour is relative to culture, some are universal eg. fight or flight, so full understanding requires study of universals and cultural variations
-researcher may perceive results different to someone of the culture being tested. eg Takahashi found Japanese infants became very distressed during the strange situation due to culture differences not attachment type.
Free will
2+,2-
+fits with what we experience in everyday life as we feel we make our own decisions. Also reinforced in legal system as humans seen responsible for actions therefore helps maintain calm and order in society
+psychological benefits as research shows having internal locus of control, individual are more mentally healthy. Whereas individuals with external locus of control are more likely to be depressed. Even if we don’t have free will, believing we do has positive mental impact
-only suited to individualist cultures. In collectivist cultures a greater emphasis is placed on behaviour determined by group so less likely to value free will. Free will is culturally bias and ethnocentric
-contradicting evidence eg. Benjamin Libet et al recorded activity in motor cortex of brain before person had conscious awareness of their decision. Shows even in simple actions, we don’t have free will, our brain decides for us
Determinism
2+,2-
+diagnosing mental illness suggests behaviour is determined as symptoms are not things people choose to do eg. depressed patient being suicidal. Medication can remove symptoms, showing biological factors determine behaviour
+Benjamin + Libet- activity in motor cortex before pps were aware
+If we know what causes certain behaviours we can intervene to prevent them eg. certain genetics involved in murder, we can identify individuals with that make up and offer support to prevent it
-bad for mental health as internal locus of control means you’re more happy
-ethical issues as if people not seen as responsible for actions we can’t punish criminals for their actions. Also if mental health is only determined by biological factors, treatment will focus on medication and ignore other factors
Nature nurture debate
4 discussion points
- difficult to study. Never discover exact extent of how nature, nurture influences behaviour. eg. MZ twins never have 100% concordance rates as they never share the exact same environment
-deterministic, purely nativist is biological determinist, empiricists are environmentally determinist. Negative implications of both views if people are responsible for their actions and can be punished by law
-nurture can affect nature eg. maguires taxi study found neuroplasticity, environmental factor of learning roads increased volume in posterior hippocampus. Humans influenced by many factors, not solely nature or nurture
-epigenetics, suggests genes can be activated or deactivated, so if someone has the gene for OCD and is exposed to stress, the gene could be switched on causing OCD. This is then passed down through generations, adding another element to the debate (experience of previous generations)
Reductionism
2+,2-
+focuses on one factor, easier to control variables/ design research. Allows operationalisation of variables increasing reliability, cause and effect
+prac. app. eg. reduce down to one cause we can treat that cause eg. low serotonin cause OCD prescribe SSRIs
- behaviour is complex, most supportive research down on animal eg. Pavlov, Skinner which aren’t as complex as humans, not truly reflective of behaviour
-ignores other factors eg.context. eg. prescribing SSRI only treats symptoms not cause, depression may be caused due to poverty so drugs won’t cure depression
Holism
2+,2-
+research evidence eg. Zimbardo, shows behaviour is influenced by interactions, which couldn’t be understood by focusing on one factor, more accurate understanding
+research shown we can’t just look at bio factors eg. schemas developed in childhood can cause depression, by understanding the individual as a whole, we get a more accurate representation
-difficult to test, as can’t isolate/ operationalise variables, focusing on individuals makes difficult to generalise, can’t state cause and effect
-difficult to apply, considers all factors, difficult to know what to treat first when treating depression for example, reductionism may be more practical
Idiographic
2+,2-
+can make predictions, once researcher has observed individuals, can make generalisations and formulate theories eg. Freud, useful as qualitative data gathers lots of detail
+practical applications as can develop drug treatments, can help develop nomothetic as they are dichotomous eg. Millon and Davis suggest research start with nomothetic to devise laws, then focus on idiographic
-difficult to apply as only focuses on individual and doesn’t make comparisons, takes lots of time to collect data that can’t be applied to everyday life
-Lack of scientific rigour as uses qualitative data, meaning researcher has to be subjective, methods also rely on self report which can be affected by social desirability bias
Nomothetic
2+,2-
+Scientific, quantitative data, high control so cause and effect established
+we can predict behaviour due to laws, theories. This is helpful when treating mental illness as can predict who is more likely to have problems so can offer support
-only focuses on averages and statistical difference doesn’t tell us why, doesn’t tell us anything about the individual and their past experiences, doesn’t provide a full picture
-laws/theories made can’t be applied to all as we are very complex, for example MZ twins raised in the same environment but medication only works for some people, therefore should look at idiographic and nomothetic as complementary not one or the other
Socially sensitive research
2+,2-
+necessary, research into sensitive areas shouldn’t be avoided as would be irresponsible of researchers. By researching underrepresented groups, it may promote greater understanding, reduce prejudice
+practical applications, potential to change society eg research into attachment can be used to support parents, beneficial as positive implications on economy
-current guidelines inadequate as protect pps but not other people who may be affected by research, need to be careful as misinterpreted findings amplified by media
-influence of findings can be difficult to change, as findings sometimes fit with zeitgeist therefore reinforcing stereotypes and legitimising them with scientific evidence
