ISSUES& DEBATES Flashcards
culture bias 16m
AO1:
- universality= theory can be generalised and applied to everyone despite culture differences
- bias= when psycholo/rsrchrs views have had influence on data collected thus making rsrch no longer universal
ethnocentrism= belief in superiority of 1 culture group over other coz of research. involves normalising bhv of one culture labelling another abnormal 4 not having same bhvs. Caused by imposed etic=expectation for western theories & rms to b universal, also caused when researchers try and study non-western cultures from ‘outside’ – applying their own understanding to the culture e.g AINS strange sit. Japanese babies labelled as insecure coz cried when mother left but in this culture mother w;d never leave child.
- cultural relativism is pop of ethnocentrism view that all cultures shld be studied in depth so truly understood should use ‘emic’ when they research another culture (insider perspective) – to study a culture from within and to stop looking at a culture in a bias way i.e. by identifying and measuring the norm. E.G definitions of schizophrenia in the DSM-V is culturally biased as it is viewed as an abnormality however in other cultures such as Native Americans the symptoms of schizophrenia would be viewed as a gift . etic- outsider approach can look at poverty from outside
AO3
+ positive ab culture bias rsrch= resulted in actions 2 reduce culture bias coz rsrchrs travel much more now than they have previous decades 2 international conferences which have international psychologists who they can discuss & share rsrch/ findings w to develop better understanding. allows a greater understanding of psychological phenomenon in different cultures on a personal as well as professional level this causes a greater exchange of ideas and fosters an inter-cultural understanding, which may help us reduce instances of culture bias
- cosnequ culture bias= damaging effects on minority groups. e.g US army IQ test from just before the First World War asked questions which were highly culturally biased i.e. can be easily answered by Caucasians and difficult for African-Americans). The tests showed that African Americans were at the bottom of the scale with the lowest mental age leading to stereotypes of black people at the time
This is a problem because it provided scientific justification for discrimination this shows the importance of being sensitive in research and to not put a specific group at disadvantage, ensuring that research is not used as a cause or justification of discrimination - evidence for culture bias in rsrch. smith et al found rsrch on textbook on social psych found evidence for the existence of culture bias found 66% of studies were American, 32% were European and 2% from the rest of the world. demonstrates culture bias within samples suggests that in order to avoid culture bias and to make research more representative and valid, rshrs shld use different and each culture equally in their methodologies to reduce culture bias CA: some argue that the culture bias debate is just not as relevant in today’s society anymore Critics argue that in the modern day with increased global communications and interconnectedness, that such a ‘lazy’ and simplistic distinction between cultures no longer applies.
gender bias 16m
AO1:
Alpha bias= exaggerated diff between women x men. e.g men drive better/women emotional. Freuds penis envy is example
Beta= rsrch conducted and applied to both genders minimises biological diff in 2 diff genders
Androcemtrism= completely disregarding a gender usually women from research SO WHEN ONE GENDERS FINDINGS DOESNT APPLY 2 OTHER LABELLED AS ABNORMAL BHV e.g
AO3:
+
rsrch in2 gender bias created criteria 2 avoid gender bias in future studies. worrel mentioned imp using women in all types psych rsrch 2 make findings generalisable 2 all via rich qualitative & objective quantitative data collections methods. this is a pro coz makes sure gender bias doesnt occur anymore. CA: However some may argue that gender bias less likely in modern psych coz increase in reflection & support feminist psychology
- Beta bias= fight flight used on men when women tend & befriend so not applicable
- bowlby montro theory shows issues w gender bias coz can have economical issues e.g more women told to stay at home or provides w basis to stereotype gender w scientific reasoning unfair
- some rsrchrs state not much diff between genders but jus biased methods in research making it look like signif diff Rosenthal found that male experimenters tended to be more encouraging and pleasant towards female participants than male participants. This made the results appear as though the men performed less well then female= problem coz extraneous variable such as these make it difficult to truly grasp gender differences and often gives us invalid comparisons and data
Researchers therefore argue that out methodology needs to be scientifically standardised in order to correct such biases and address the issue of exaggerated gender differences in psychological research
free will vs determinism alr came 16m but ages ago
BPE determinism biological psychic & environmental
AO1
-free will suggests human free 2 choose actions doesnt ignore biological environmental factors that may lead one 2 exhibit bhv more but suggests humans choose to give in2 or reject this as shown via humanistic approach
- hard determinism- all human bhv has cause x effect principle shld be used to identify & describe effect. COMPATIBLE W AIMS OF SCIENCE e.g causal relationships thr thought& action. assumes all actions dictated by cause cld be from past
- soft determinism= large factors of life r predetermined but still have element free will w smaller decisions. acknowledge all bhv has cause w room for conscious independent thought over actions
-biolog determinism= actions&bhv predetermined by biological makeup many physiological& neurobiological processes not under control e.g mental disorders coz of neurotrans. or role of testosterone x aggression
- envir determinism= skinner free will is an illusion & bhv is coz of conditioning & reinforcement.might think we act independently but behaviours shaped via socialisation & exp of choice is coz reinforcement acted on us
-psychic determinism= human bhvr determined via unconcuois conflicts & repressed emotions from childhood that cause conflicts in mind= behaviour e.g depression caused by traumatic event e.g death
AO3
+ 4 determinism = is consistent w aims of psych as science notion of behaviour being fixed laws places psych on equal footings as sciences. & studying behaviours will help us identify cause & effect rsp which can help us predict future behaviours helping us understand more. strength coz leads 2 psych therapies e.g imbalance neurotrans= biologicla therapies which helps 2 improve lives. thus deterministic ideas of fixed psych laws help ppl lives. CA: determinism hard to study & UNFALISFIABLE coz based on the idea that the causes of behaviour exist, even though they are not always known or proven yet. e.g psychic determinism stems from childhood exp leading 2 conflict but this cant b empirically studied thus unfalsifiable & cant b consist w science .
+ 4 freewill= rsrch that belief in free will & internal locus control can b beneficial 4 mental health. rsrch Robert et al found adolescents with a strong belief in fatalism (that their lives were decided by events outside of their control) were at a significantly greater risk of developing depression. suggest tht even if we do not have free will, the fact that we think we do, may have a positive impact on mind and behaviour. belief has developed treatments such as CBT to make patients feel in control of their emotions and life events in order to lead to better treatment
Thus, demonstrates that resrch based on free will can have successful and effective applications for mental health treatments.
- AGAINST FREE WILL
refuting evidence for the notion of behaviour being influence by our free will
e.g , evidence from Soon et al. found activity related to pressing a button with either the left hand or the right hand occurs in the brain up to 10 seconds before participants report being consciously aware of making the decision
..refutes free will as shows that even thoughts that are perceived to be free will are decided and determined by our brain before we become aware of them. It suggests that free will is illusion and purely a product of neural activity in our brain
Therefore it may give us reasons to believe that what seems like free will to us may be determined by biological (or at least external) factors, reducing the value of free will
CA=Just because we are not consciously aware of our decision at first doesn’t mean we don’t have free will i.e. free will does not equal conscious.
nature vs nurture debate
AO1
nature= human characteristics/ behaviours/thoughts & emotions r all due 2 innate mechanism e.g inherited from parents coz of genes. not much of environment can b learnt/changed.
nurture= we r all born tabula rasa= blank slates in which we learn & develop via environment. Bandura= term reciprocal determinism when behaviour impacts environment & in turn environment impacts bhvr
nature or nurture= debate ab which approach more dominant thus interactionalists =consider how both nature & nurture play role in human bhvr e.g mental illness
AO3
+ for nature= MZ=40% concord rate 4 schiz DZ=7% CA= not 100% so nurture environment?
+ nurture more dominant Maguire hippocampus of London taxi drivers coz of job role
+ support for nu
AO3 interactionist approach= rsrch in2 epigenetic refuted idea of adopting either absolute nature/nurture stance in explaining human bhvr. e.f Dias et al gave male lab mice electric shocks every time exposed 2 smell of acetophenome (chemical in perfume). found rats offspring also feared smell even tho not exposed 2 acetophenone before or receiving any shocks. DEMONSTRATES ENV INFLUENCES LEAD 2 CHANGE IN GENETIC ACTIVTY w out changing genetic code. SUPPORTS NURTURE ALSO EXTENDS 2 SUPPORT NATURE . interactionalist evidence emphasises imp of having models tht take in2 account both nature & nurture influences & deems “hard” nature or nurture as incomplete explanations of behaviour
Holism v reductionism
reudctionsim= breaking down in2 simplest components 2 explain behaviour BPS MODEL BLOWEST PMIDDLE STOP
lowest=biological e. Maguire mem 2 one area in brain ,
then middle = psych explansations e.g cog/behav millers magic 7
top= social & cultural e.g
- bio reductionism= OCD coz of low seratonin
- env= acquisition phobias classical con & mainten operant
- HOLISM= all e.g integrated expl e.g humanistic app qualitative methods
AO3
+ strength 2 reductionist app= applications 2 development of treatments. coz breaking comp in2 simplest terms & LOWEST LEVEL. e.g OCD simplest= imbalance seratonin coz of synap.SSRI created 2 help & is effectiv. soomro showed SSRI work in 70% of users. CA= therapies e.g CBT which is middle level reductionism when these work tithe patients symptoms further alleviated thus interactionist approach may b better expl.
+ REDUCTIONISM IS SCIENTIFIC. e.g can create operationalised variables which break target bhvrs down in2 comp parts making obvs reliable & valid. e.g behaviourist pavlov dog. THUS ALLOW CAUSAL RSP ALSO BETTER REPLI MAKING PSYCH MORE SCIENTIFIC CRED. CA= artificial tasks.
- HOLISM not scientific. e.g humanistic approach criticised 4 lack of empirical evidence for self actualisation. problem coz non scientific branches may hold back field in achieving scientific aspirations. PLUS higher level expl pose problems for researchers e.g if accept social environmental rzsns 4 depression its diff 2 measure them in controlled env & come up w specific treatments 2 target inadequancoes/ so problems harm validity of holism.
- REDUCTIONISM OVERSIMPLIFIES which may reduce validity of explanations. e.g expl surrounding gene neurotrans/ neurone level dont include analysis of social context within bhvr occur. E.G DEPR CAN HAVE ENV FCATORS E.G LOSS OF DEATG but these wld be ignored thus reductionism can only form PART of expl & thus incompl expl.
Idiographic v nomothetic
AO1
- idiographic= researches individual & attempt 2 describe the nature of individual
ppl r studied as unique entities each w their own subjectives exp motivations & values
no attempt made at comparing individual with others, assosciated w qualitative data & research methods- case studies unstructured interviews & self reports.
central aim- 2 describe richness of human exp & gain insight into persons unique way pf viewing world. e.g psychodynamic app & oedious complex
- nomothetic= focuses developing norms & general laws ab human bhvr
- provides benchmark against which ppl can b compared classified & measured e.g IQ. can be used on basis 2 predict future bhvrs e.g 5HTT gene for OCD.
- uses scientific methodologies w psych such as exp quantitative/numerical data used in stat analysis 2 work out central tendencies of behaviour.
- involves large n. ppl 2 establish how ppl r similar
AO3
+ idio. in depth coz uses qualitative data providing is w more COMPLETE account of individual than nomothetic methods. E.G CASET STUDY of Clive wearing which provided valuable insights ab functioning of mem. but nomothetic approaches may rule out such cases that r not the norm e.g Clive contracted disease so leads 2 missed opportunities for research. thus IDIOGRAPH approach shld be credited for willingness 2 treat every individ as unique & meaningful which can lead 2 valuable conclusions.
- however limitation of idiog= rsrch methods whilst in depth & rich w data, cant b generalised 2 all popul. hard 2 deduce cause x effect rsp & rarely control group present 2 compare results. also problem= have 2 be subjective w interp that can be bias. thus idiog approach can lack validity
+ nomothetic rm more scientific coz in order 2 set general laws for all society uses STANDARDISED methods using quantitive methods which provides averages & lend themselves well 2 stat analysis. THIS CAN HELP US DETERMINE group norm e.g identifying average IQ is 100. knowledge can b extended 2 help identify abnormalities by drawing up cut off points beyond which bhvr considered abnormal e.g IQ below 70 seen as disorder- IDD. thus not only can nomothetic have SCIENTIFIC credibility but can also b applied 2 identify abnormalities.
- BUT nomothetic tends 2 lose whole person. w general laws & predictability doesnt let us fully understand emotions & feelings related 2 behaviour. e.g knowing that theres 1% lifetime risk developing schiz gives little understanding ab what life like 4 person w disorder- meaning in terms of generalisations nomothetic may overlook richness of human exp. thus adopting exclusively nomothetic practices 2 research many hinder ability 2 truly understand bhvrs & how 2 help someone w it.
WT IS INTERACTIONIST APPROACH AND AO3
basc saying its not jus nature Vs nurture its both so no debate jus mix
AO3
rsrch in2 epigenetic refuted idea of adopting either absolute nature/nurture stance in explaining human bhvr. e.f Dias et al gave male lab mice electric shocks every time exposed 2 smell of acetophenome (chemical in perfume). found rats offspring also feared smell even tho not exposed 2 acetophenone before or receiving any shocks. DEMONSTRATES ENV INFLUENCES LEAD 2 CHANGE IN GENETIC ACTIVTY w out changing genetic code. SUPPORTS NURTURE ALSO EXTENDS 2 SUPPORT NATURE . interactionalist evidence emphasises imp of having models tht take in2 account both nature & nurture influences & deems “hard” nature or nurture as incomplete explanations of behaviour
ethical implications
AO1
- ethical implic= conflict between the needs of the psych 2 gain valid & valuable rsrch & prsrbing rights & dignity of ppts can result to ethical isses
- ethical guidelines introduced 2 protect ppt but its more diff 2 protect ppt after rsrch conducted
- rsrchr also no control over way their rsrch used once published e.g meida
- means no control over society perceives the studies demographic
- socially sensitive rsrch= any rsrch that can cause negative implic 2 specific demographic
- rsrch can be viewed as very controversial & goes beyond rsrch situations
- will effect particular rsrhced demographic & can lead 2 mistreatment in society
- but psycholg shldnt shy away from rsrch coz resposbiltiy 2 carry out it & help others
ethical issues in socially sens rsrch= negative implications e,g using scientific justification 2 disciminate
public policy- what will rsrch b used for? may b used for wrong purposes e.g political benefit of laws
- validity of research
how 2 deal w ethical issue socially sens rsrch= shld have awareness of issue & ELIMINATE consequences that releasing socially sens rsrch can have on ppt in terms of implic, public policy & validity of rsrch.
- rsrch worded in non emotive, informative & non leading way. shld avoid bias & any exaggeration.
AO3
+ socially sens rsrhc= despite ethical implications assosc w rsrch in2 controversial topics they lead 2 meaningful findings. e.g scarr argues tht studies of underrepresented groups & issues may promote greater sensitivity & understanding of these which can help reduce prejudice & encourage acceptance. additionally rsrch e.g carried Loftus= eat reduced risk of miscarriages of justice within legal system by making us way of accepting ewt as substantial evidence. suggests socially sens research can play crucial role in society & help us improve its institutions.
- neg implicit can b seen via Simon BARON COHEN study on levels of testosterone in amniotic fluid & link w autism. he found positive correlation. when RSRCH PUBLISHED media PICKED UP & one article w guardian outlined headline that new research brings autism screening to reality going onto interpreting findings w applying it to issue of terminating preganaices wgiucg ISNT WT INITIAL STUDY WAS CONDUCTED FOR. this rsrch cld lead 2 changes in public policy affecting individuals or groups e.g foetuses in womb w high levels testosteron. as result Simon had to write new article outlining how research was not related to pre natal screening for autism. therefore this research shows how psychological research need TO BE CAREFUL IN CONSIDERING THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF RESEARCH & HOW IT MAY BE INTERPETED & APPLIED by media.
- shown in bowlby maternal dep theory of critical period criticised. coz cld lead babies raised in daycare 2 be judged instead of those at home w stay at home mother 2 b stereotyped & feel helpless coz env was predetermined therefore issues w future attachments or can lead 2 increased pressures on mothers 2 stay w children in imp times of life 4 healthy development. alt it was imp and taught us ab child attachments its been criticised as being socially sensitive
- inadequacy of ethical guidlines. rsrchs dealt w ethical issues within research by developing strict ethical guid for conduct of their studies. whilst guidelines may protect ppt within research.. may not deal w all possible ways rsrch cld inflict long term harm on group of ppl/society. misrepresented when they have been included
The failure to accurately represent and research groups such as people with disabilities, the elderly or disadvantaged, carries with it an additional ethical issue - the fact that these groups then miss out on any of the potential benefits of research e.g. a way to treat mental illnesses which the group may be vulnerable to
This emphasises the need to revisit our guidelines to construct a better framework. This would help psychologists to protect participants in the long-term and encourage researchers to conduct more SSR for us all to benefit from
