Mock

Question 1

What was Rosenhan (1973) samlple

Answer 1

• 8 people
• 5 male 3 female
• some with psychology background

Question 2

what was Rosenhans procedure?

Answer 2

• pseudo patients sought admission to institutions as complaining of hearing voices
• this was the only made up symptom : everything was normal
• on admission they stopped hearing voices and responded normally to all instructions and said they felt fine and well
• they then had to seek release and observe and record their experiences

Question 3

Describe the aim of Sherif et al

Answer 3

To investigate relations between groups

to see whether strangers brought together into a group with common goals will form a close group

to see whether 2 groups brought into competitions would become hostile and to see whether it was possible to reduce the hostility

Question 4

Sherif et al sample

Answer 4

• 22 boys
• Age 11
• selected by opportunity sampling
• all from middle class american protestant families in oklahoma
• fee of $25 paid to parents to incentivise them to not visit kids at camp

-matched on IQ and sporting ability and put in different groups

Question 5

Define opportunity sampling

Answer 5

The researcher chooses participants based on availability and willingness to take part in

Question 6

one strength and one weakness of opportunity sampling

Answer 6

• quick and convenient
• not very representative of the wider population

Question 7

Summarise the method used by sherif et al

Answer 7

• stage 1: groups bonded , weren’t aware of each other , made aware after a week

stage 2 :tournament with competitive activities - baseball and bean experiment

• stage 3 : groups brought together to bond, joint problem solving activists - superordinate goal e.g. vandals had blocked water supply and had to work together to remove blockage

Question 8

summarise the results of Sherif et al

Answer 8

stage 1- boys bonded in separate groups and discussed a dislike for the other group even though they hadn’t met

stage 2- competition led to hostility - 93% selected friends exclusively from their in-group

stage 3- groups together without competition was not enough to reduce hostility, joint activities did reduce it, out group friendship choice 6.4% Rattlers at end of stage 2 but rose to 36.4% by end of stage 3

Question 9

sherif et al conclusion

Answer 9

competition is factor in leading to discrimination but it takes place without completion
contact between 2 groups not enough to reduce hostility
groups work together- reduces prejudice

Question 10

How was rosenhans study valid

Answer 10

• ecological validity: used 12 different hospitals, so minimised risk with generalisability issues
• valid as the staff were unaware of the study so lack of social desirability and demand characteristics
• natural setting so behaviours can be determined to be natural
• unstructured so rich in qualitative data e.g nurse undressing in front of patients which shows they didnt see them as ‘real people’

Question 11

How was rosenhans study reliable

Answer 11

• he followed a standardised procedure
  all p’s were trained to act the same way

Question 12

Ethical issues with rosenhans study

Answer 12

• contributed to a crisis of public confidence in the American mental health system
  prevent people who needed help from seeking it
• failing duty of care towards pseudo patients :
  put them in a harmful environment where they experienced tension and stress
  if they had been forced to take medication they would have experienced side effects

Question 13

What was it that Rosenhan set out to investigate

Answer 13

The validity and reliability of psychiatric diagnosis

Question 14

sherif et al basics

Answer 14

• matched pairs design
• not replicable

Question 15

How is sherif et al study reliable

Answer 15

• he used multiple observers so high inter rater reliability
• he used a number scoring system for boy’s friendship patters , collecting quantitative data