Named Studies Unit 1 Flashcards
Thomas, Chess and Birch
Aim: To discover whether ways of responding to the environment remain stable through life.
Method: Studied 133 children from infancy to early adulthood. The children’s behaviour was observed and their parents were interviewed. The parents were asked about the child’s routine and it’s reactions to change.
Results: They found that the children fell into three types: ‘easy’, ‘difficult’ and ‘slow to warm up’. The ‘easy’ children were happy, flexible and regular. The ‘difficult’ children were demanding, inflexible and cried a lot. The ‘slow to warm up’ did not respond well to change or new experiences to begin with, but once they had adapted they were usually happy.
Conclusion: These ways of responding to the environment stayed with the children as they developed. Thomas, Chess and Birch therefore concluded that temperament is innate.
Buss and Plomin
Aim: To test the idea that temperament is innate.
Method: They studied 228 pairs of monozygotic twins and 172 pairs of dizygotic twins. They rated the temperament of the twins when they were five years old. They looked at three dimensions of behaviour:
• emotionality - how strong the child’s emotional response was
• activity - how energetic the child was
• sociability - how much the child wanted to be with other people.
They then compared the scores for each pair of twins.
Results: There was a closer correlation between the scores of the monozygotic twins than between the scores of the dizygotic twins.
Conclusion: Temperament has a genetic basis.
Kagan and Snidman
Aim: To see whether temperament is due to biological differences.
Method: Kagan and Snidman studied the reactions of four-month-old babies to new situations. For the first minute the baby was placed in a seat with the caregiver sitting nearby. For the next three minutes the caregiver moved out of the baby’s view while the baby was shown different toys by the researcher.
Results: Twenty per cent of the babies showed distress by crying, vigorous movement of the arms and legs and watching of the back. They were classed as high reactive. Forty per cent of the babies showed little movement or emotion. They were classed as low reactive. The remaining infants fell somewhere between the two.
In a follow-up study, 11 years later, Kagan and Snidman found there was still a difference in the way the two groups reacted to new situations; the high reactives were shy while the low reactives were calm.
Conclusion: Kagan and Snidman concluded that’s these two temperaments are due to inherited differences in the way the brain responds.
Eysenck
Aim: To investigate the personality of 700 servicemen.
Method: Each soldier completed a questionnaire. Eysenck analysed the results using a statistical technique known as factor analysis.
Results: He identified two dimensions of personality: extraversion-introversion and neuroticism-stability.
Conclusion: Everyone can be placed along these two dimensions of personality. Most people lie in the middle of the scale.
Raine
Aim: To support the theory that abnormalities in the prefrontal cortex cause APD.
Method: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to study 21 men with APD and a control group of 34 healthy men. The subjects were volunteers.
Results: The APD group had an 11 per cent reduction in prefrontal grey matter compared with the control group.
Conclusion: APD is caused by a reduction in the brain’s grey matter.
Farrington
Aim: To investigate the development of offending and antisocial behaviour in males studied from childhood to the age of 50.
Method: The researchers carried out a longitudinal study of the development of antisocial and offending behaviour in 411 males. They all lived in a deprived, inner-city area of London. They were first studied at the age of 8 and were followed up until the age of 50. Their parents and teachers were also interviewed. Searches were carried out at the Criminal Records Office to discover if they, or family members, had been convicted of a crime.
Results: Forty-one per cent of the males were convicted of at least one offence between the ages of 10 and 50. The most important risk factors for offending were criminal behaviour in the family, low school achievement, poverty and poor parenting.
Conclusion: Situational factors lead to the development of antisocial behaviour.
Elander et al
Aim: To investigate the childhood risk factors that can be used to predict antisocial behaviour in adulthood.
Method: Researchers investigated 225 twins who were diagnosed with childhood disorders and interviewed them 10-25 years later.
Results: Elander et al found that childhood hyperactivity, conduct disorders, low IQ and reading problems were strong predictors of APD and criminality in adult life.
Conclusion: Disruptive behaviour in childhood can be used to predict APD in adulthood.
