Issues + Debates: AO3 Flashcards
Gender Bias AO3
+ feminist psychologsts propose how it can be avioded: a branch of psychology that aims to readress imbalances, agree bio differences but argue social stereotypes make greater contribution, suggest should use evidence proposing women inferior to provide support, e.g. claim women less effective leaders, knowledge used to develop training programmes
+ led to reflexivity: when researchers recognise effect own values have on work, embrace bias as important aspect instead of problem threatening objectivity
- promotes sexism in research process: women remain underrepresented in uni departments depsite undergrad intake mainly female, male researchers more likely to have work published and female concerns may not be reflected
- gender bias in psychological research: research challenging bias may not be published, Formanowicz et al (2018) analysed over 1000 articles relating to gender bias, found research on bias funded less often and is also published in less prestigious journals
Culture Bias AO3
+ cross cultural research challenges dominant individualist ways of thinking: being able to see knowledge and concepts take for granted aren’t hardwired may provide better understanding of human nature, some are universal, Ekman (1989) suggests basic facial expressions are same
+ emergence of cultural psychology: study of how people shape and are shaped by cultural experience, incorporates work from researchers in other disciplines, strive to avoid ethnocentric assumptions by taking emic approach, conduct research from inside culture alongside local researchers
- distinction between individualist and collectivist: lazy, simplistic, no longer applies, Takano and Osaka (1999) found 14/15 studies comparing USA and Japan show no evidence of distinction between cultures, Van Ijzendoorn (1998) found more variation within than between
- led to prejudice: Gould (1981) explained how first intelligense tests led to eugenic social policies in US, psychologists used WW1 to pilot first IQ tests on recruits, many items ethnocentric, recruits from south eastern Europe and African-Americans received lowest scores, deemed ‘mentall unfit’ and ‘feeble minded’, denied educational and professional opportunities
Free Will AO3
+ intuitively correct: subjective experience of most is some way in control of own actions and behaviours, humanists acknowledges this and one of few approaches to adopt free will, Carl Rogers’ Client Centred Therapy based on notion of free will, people seen as being free to effect change in lives by choosing to see situation differently
- impossible to test: non physical phenomenon, difficult to quantify and measure, psychology is science, at odds with discipline, resolution of debate not currently likely, if measurement become possible may be able to resolve, argument is free will isn’t measurable because doesn’t exist
Determinism AO3
+ consistent with aims of science: led to development of successful treatments, if SZ is bio determined then treatments should target these systems, Leucht et al (2012) found 64% of SZ patients on placebo relapsed compared to 27% on antipsychotic, suggests determined
- doubtful 100% genetic or environmental determinism ever be found: studies of SZ that compare MZ twins have found 40% concordance rate (Joseph 2004), significant but genes don’t entirely determine, also shows environment isn’t sole determining factor
Nature Nurture Debate AO3
+ adoption studies: separate competing influences, if adopted children found to be more similar to adoptive parents then environment biggest influence, if more similar to bio parents then genetic factors dominate, meta analysis Rhee and Waldman (2002) found genetic influences accounted for 41% of variance in aggression, misguided approach, aren’t two entities, Plomin (1994) said people create own nurture by actively selecting environments appropriate for their nature, naturally aggressive child will pick friends who show similar behaviours
+ real world applications: OCD highly heritable mental disorder, Nestadt et al (2010) found heritability rate at .76, mostly down to nature, debate can inform genetic counselling, high heritability doesn’t mean inevatibility of developing disorder
- unethical implications if looked at independently: nativists suggest ‘anatomy is destiny’, genetic makeup determines characteristics and behaviour with little environmental input, extreme determinist led to controversy, linking ethnicity, genetics and intelligence an application of eugenic policies, empiricists suggest any behaviour can be changed by altering environmental conditions, practical applications in therapy, desirable behaviours selectively reinforced, undesirable behaviours punished or ignored, carried to extreme could lead to complete social control by state for ‘good’
- can’t be separated: disorder phenylketonuria inherited, if detected at birth infant can be given diet devoid of phenylalanine to avert brain damage, if prevention achieved through environmental manipulation can’t be said whether due to nature or nurture
Socially Sensitive Research AO3
+ certain groups rely on SS research: government looks to research when developing important social policies, eg decisions related to childcare, education, mental health provision, crime, preferable to base policies on scientific research rather than politically motivated views, research into unreliability of EWT caused loads of cases to be reviewed and reduced risk of miscarriages of justice within legal system
+ benefits for group studied: 1952 DSM-1 listed homosexuality as ‘sociopathic personality disorder’, removed in 1973, credited to Kinsey report based on anonymous interviews with men about sexual behaviour, concluded homosexuality normal variant of human sexual behaviour
- poor research design leads to erroneous findings: Burt’s 11+ still used even after exposed, access to many independent schools based on performance in exam based on same reasoning, genetic potential revealed itself, issues also lead to indirect impact on peoples families, co workers or even represented group, need to think beyond safeguarding intersts of ps and think of likely impact on larger group
- costs and benefits difficult to predict: scrutinised by ethics committee, some social consequences involving vunerable groups difficult to anticipate
Holism AO3
+ certain behaviours only explained at holistic level: aspects of social behaviour only emerge within group context and can’t be understood in terms of individual group members, effects of conformity to social roles in prisoners and guards in Stanford prison study couldn’t be understood by observing participants as individuals, interaction between people and behaviour of group that was important.
- holistic accounts hard to use as complex: present researchers with practical dilemma, if accept, from a humanistic perspective, many different factors that contribute to depression (the person’s past, their present relationships, their job and family circumstances), becomes difficult to know which is most influential, difficult to know which to prioritise as basis of therapy, for instance.
Reductionism AO3
+ br led to successful treatments: considerable reduction in institutionalisation since 1950s, more humane approach to treatment of mental illness, don’t blame patient, lead to greater tolerance of mentally ill, drug therapies not always successful and reducing mental illness to bio level ignores context and function of such behaviour.
+ er leads to basis of scientific approach: to conduct well-controlled research need to operationalise variables to be studied, makes it possible to conduct experiments or record observations (behavioural categories) in way that is objective and reliable, research on attachment (Strange Situation) operationalised component behaviours such as separation anxiety.
- br argue thoughts result of what happens in brain: basis of cognitive neuroscience - cognitive processes associated with physical processes in brain, neuroscientists struggle to explain subjective experience of same neural process, thinking about colour blue involves same region and activity in brain as thinking about colour red, yet thought we experience is different.
- er developed with experiments on animals: appropriate to explain non-human animals’ behaviour in terms of simple components, may not be appropriate for more complex human behaviour, humans not scaled-up versions of other animals, in non-human animals, reductionist explanations ignore other possible influences such as cognitive and/or emotional factors.
Idiographic AO3
+ case studies: evidence from single case study can challenge scientific findings/theory and form basis and ideas for further scientific study, allows to study problems couldn’t create on mass scale in lab e.g. HM who had major brain surgery to cure epilepsy, give more complete understanding as combine biological and social aspects of individual’s life
- non scientific: subjective experience can’t be empirically tested and lacks reliability, difficult to generalise from detailed subjective knowledge about one person.
Nomothetic AO3
+ scientific: develops laws and theories which can be empirically tested through precise measurement, prediction and control of behaviour, investigations of large groups, objective and controlled methods allowing replication and generalisation.
- superficial understanding: some may act same for different reasons and predictions made about group may not apply to individuals, extensive use of controlled lab experiments which create lack of generalisation to everyday life.
