Paper 1 Flashcards
Define social influence
The process by which individuals and groups change each other’s attitudes and behaviours.
Define compliance.
A person agrees in public with a group of people, but privately disagrees with the groups viewpoints or behaviour. They temporarily changed their views.
Example of compliance.
a person may laugh at a joke that they don’t find funny just because their friends think it is
Supporting evidence for compliance.
Asch’s study.
Define identification.
When someone conforms to the demands of a given social role in society.
This conformity extends over several aspects of behaviour, but there’s no change in personal opinion.
Example of identification.
Social roles, including a policeman, teacher or politicians.
Supporting evidence for identification.
Zimbardo’s prison studies.
Internalisation definition.
Publicly changing behaviour to fit in with the group and agreeing with their views in private. This is both an internal and external change in behaviour and is the deepest level of conformity as the groups beliefs become individuals beliefs.
Example of internalisation.
Someone living with a vegetarian at university decides to become one as they agree with their friends viewpoints.
Supporting evidence for internalisation.
Acsh’s study.
How does informational social influence explain conformity?
The desire to be right. We conform as we are unsure about the situation and lack the knowledge, so we look to others who we believe have more information than us. This leads to internalisation.
Example of informational social influence.
Going to a posh restaurant with different forks: you would look to someone else to see which fork to use first.
Strength of informational social influence.
Supporting evidence: Students answer hard and easy maths questions and were shown incorrect responses. More conformities occured for the more difficult questions, especially among those who were already poor at maths. This shows we are more likely to agree with others when completing a difficult task and we are uncertain of the answer.
Limitation of informational social influence.
Insko suggests that informational social influence and normative social influence are not exclusive, but operate together into order to produce conforming behaviour.
How does normative social influence explain conformity?
The desire to be liked. We conform in order to fit in with the group because we don’t want to look foolish or be left out. This tends to lead to compliance, which is a change in public behaviour but not in private beliefs. This is only a temporary change.
Example of normative social influence.
Someone feeling pressurised to smoke because the rest of their friends are.
Strength of normative social influence.
In a study, adolescents who were told that the majority of people their age don’t smoke were less likely to start smoking than those who had not been given this message. This shows that people conform due to a desire to fit in and be the same as a group that is similar to themselves.
Limitation of normative social influence.
There is conflicting evidence, as science and engineering students were less likely to agree with others who gave the wrong answer in Acsh’s line study. This shows that individual differences can affect whether people are affected by normative social influence.
Procedures of Acsh’s original line study into conformity.
5 to 7 participants per group were presented with one standard line and three comparison lines. Participants were to say out loud which line matched the standard line. There was only one real participant per group, and the rest were confederates who gave the wrong answer on 12 out of 18 of the trials.
Aim of Asch’s line study.
To investigate whether people would conform in situations where the answers were obvious.
Findings of Acsh’s original study.
Participants conformed on 37% of the 12 critical trials. 74% of participants conformed at least once and 5% conformed on all trials. Participants said they conformed as they didn’t want the rest of the group to judge them.
Conclusions of Acsh’s original line study.
People feel a strong pressure to be the same as others and will conform even when they know what they’re doing and saying is wrong. There’s considerable individual variation in how people respond to this pressure.
Strength of line study.
There are practical applications as it helps understand the decision-making of jurors and why people engage in harmful behaviours such as smoking.
Limitations of line study
Considerable ethical issues such as deception and psychological harm.
What are the three variables that are found to affect conformity?
Group size, unanimity and task difficulty.
Group size procedures
They changed the number of Confederates in the group.
Group size findings.
When there is 2 Confederates, there was a 13% conformity rate. When there was three Confederates, there was a 32% conformity rate. And there was little increase inconformity rates for numbers above 3 Confederates.
Group size conclusions.
A group of just three people is sufficient to exert conformity pressures on an individual and that a large majority is not necessary.
Unanimity procedures.
One Confederate gives the right answer or a Confederate gives a different answer that’s also wrong.
Unanimity findings.
when one Confederate gives the right answer the conformity rate was 5% and when one Confederate gives a different answer, the conformity rate was 9%.
Unanimity conclusions.
A majority has influence due to its unanimity. In a group that isn’t unanimous, conformity pressures are lower and people are more likely to act individually.
Task difficulty procedures.
They changed the comparison lines so it was harder to tell which was the correct line - made it look more similar to the standard lines.
Task difficulty findings.
When the line lengths were more similar conformity increased
Task difficulty conclusions.
If a situation is ambiguous or difficult. Then people begin to look to others for the correct answer and assume that others are correct.
Zimbardo study procedures.
Converted Stanford University basement into a mock prison.
Volunteer sample deemed psychologically and physically sound were allocated prisoner or guards in a simulated prison environment for two weeks.
Prisoners were arrested at home, blindfolded, searched, deloused, given a uniform and number and had to obey the guards rules.
Guards given uniform, club, handcuffs, mirrored sunglasses and absolute power over prisoners.
Zimbardo study findings.
Guards became increasingly brutal and aggressive, enjoying the power they had over the prisoners - eg: made prisoners clean a toilet with their bare hands
Within two days the prisoners rebelled but guards responded with severe behaviour
The prisoners became subdued, depressed, anxious and passive - mindlessly complied with guards’ orders
5 prisoners had to be released because they showed signs of psychological disturbance (these reactions began after only two days)
Zimbardo ended the study after 6 days rather than the intended 14.
Zimbardo study conclusions.
People readily conform to the social role that they occupy, and behaviour is strongly influenced by social situations. People who behave badly aren’t always bad people.
Strength of Zimbardo study.
Good control over extraneous variables. For example random allocations to roles. This shows that behaviour was not due to personality.
Limitation of Zimbardo study.
Over exaggerates the power of social roles. for example, some guards behave differently -only a third was sadistic, some were fair and some helped the prisoners. This shows that people choose how to adopt social roles.
Define obedience
This is a type of social influence where an individual follows an order from another person usually an authority figure.
Milgram original study procedures.
The participant will assigned the teacher role and the Confederate was assigned the learner. Teacher and learner will put in separate rooms. The teacher was asked by an experimental to administer electric shocks, increasing from 15 to 450 volts each time the wrong answer was given.
If a participant didn’t want to administer shocks, the experimenter said please continue followed by. The experiment requires you to continue followed by. It is absolutely essential that you continue followed by. You have no choice but to continue.
Milgram original study findings.
All participants shocked up to 300 volts, and 65% went to the full 450.
Throughout the study, participants showed signs of distress such as twitching, giggling nervously and sweating.
Milgram original study conclusions.
People find it difficult to refuse orders from someone with a legitimate authority. When given ordered by authority figures, they enter an agentic state where they lose their moral values and responsibility for their actions.
What situational variables can affect obedience?
Proximity, location and uniform.
Proximity procedure.
Close proximity: teacher and learner was sat in the same room / teachers were forced to put the learners hand on a shock plate.
not close proximity: Researcher gave instructions over the phone.
Proximity findings.
40% gave 450 volts when in the same room. 30% gave 450 volts went pressing the learners hand onto a shock plate and 20.5% gave 450 volts when the researcher was not in the room
Proximity conclusions.
The closer the proximity, the lower the rate of obedience.
Location procedure.
Milgram’s original study was done in a less impressive location than Yale University: A shabby office block.
Location findings.
47.5% gave the 450 volts.
Location Conclusions.
The more prestigious the location, the more confidence in legitimacy of authority so the higher the rate of obedience.
Uniform procedures.
Three male actors dressed as a milkman, security guards or ordinary clothes asked members of the public to either pick up a bag, give money for parking, or stand on the other side of the bus stop where there was an no standing sign.
Uniform findings.
76% obeyed the guard, 47% obeyed the milkman and only 30% obeyed the ordinary man.
Uniform conclusion.
People are more likely to obey when instructed to by someone wearing in uniform, as it implies a sense of legitimate authority.
Do Milgram’s findings accurately reflect how people respond to an authority figure?
No, because the participants did not believe that the shocks were real and because the behaviour of the participants would not be replicated in a situation outside of the laboratory setting.
Milgram’s study supporting evidence.
A study by Sheridan and King involved participants giving a real electric shocks to puppies when ordered to by researcher. 77% obeyed, giving what they thought was a fatal shock. This shows high level of obedience when it is clear that the shocks were real.
Another study in the hospital found that 21 out of 22 nurses followed the orders of a bogus Dr, even if it went against hospital procedure and potentially put a patient at risk. This shows that Milgram’s findings demonstrate obedience to authority in everyday life.
Two ethical issues raised by Milgram’s research.
Deception as participants believed they were shocking a real person and were unaware the learner was a Confederate.
Protection from harm as participants were exposed to extremely stressful situations with the potential to cause psychological harm. They were also visibly distressed as they were trembling, sweating, stuttering and biting lips.
Legitimacy of authority.
People tend to obey others if they recognise their authority as morally right or legally based. This authority often comes from the backing of a social institution who have the ability to give punishments to people who do not obey
Supporting evidence for legitimacy of authority.
In Milgram study, maximum levels of obedience were attributed to the authority of Yale University. This is because obedience levels fell in an office block.
Data of aviation accidents and near misses. In flight recorder evidence, excessive obedience was showing to the captains authority and staff were less likely to challenge risky actions.
The authoritarian personality.
a personality that is disposed to favour obedience to authority and intolerance of outgroups and those lower in status
Adorno’s research procedures.
2000 middle class white Americans completed several personality scales to investigate the attitudes to other racial groups.
They completed the F scale, which assesses tendency towards fascism and measures authoritarian personality.
Adorno’s research findings.
Those who scored highly on the F scale were dismissive of people they regarded as weak, conscious of their own status and the status of others. They respected and were submissive towards those of higher status. They had a rigid cognitive scale and there was a positive correlation between the authoritarian personality and prejudice.
Conclusions from Adornos research study.
Having an authoritarian personality creates a tendency to be very obedient to authority.
Features of the authoritarian personality.
Submissive to and have respect for authority figures.
Contempt of people with inferior social status.
Conventional attitudes towards sex, sexual orientation, gender roles and racial issues.
Believe countries need strong, forceful leaders to apply traditional values such as patriotism, religion and family.
They have fixed views of right and wrong and are uncomfortable with uncertainty.
How does the authoritarian personality develop?
Individuals unable to express hostility towards their strict and critical parents displace the aggression and hostility onto safer, weaker targets such as ethnic minorities.
Strength of the authoritarian personality.
Supporting evidence: Participants completed Milgram’s study in an immersive virtual environment where participants were aware that shocks and the learners reaction was simulated. There is a positive correlation between the score on a measure of authoritarian personality and the shocks they were prepared to give. This shows that obedience can be explained by authoritarian personalities.
Limitation of authoritarian personality.
Some would argue that situational context is a more important in explaining obedience. Levels of obedience varies in relation to proximity, location, and presence of another disobedient Confederate. A dispositional explanation, such as authoritarian personality cannot account for these variations.
Internal locus of control.
the perception that you control your own fate
Are individuals with an internal locus of control more or less likely to resist social influence?
They are more likely to resist social influence.
Why are people with an internal locus of control more likely to resist social influence?
They are less likely to rely on others as they feel responsible for their own actions.
They can with stand the discomfort of resisting pressure to conform / obey an authority figure and would feel more discomfort if they let someone else control their actions
They are more confident and have less of a need for social approval.
External locus of control.
the perception that chance or outside forces beyond your personal control determine your fate.
Are individuals with an external locus of control more or less likely to resist social influence?
They are less likely to resist social influence.
Why are people with an external locus of control less likely to resist social influence?
They are more likely to rely on others. They can’t withstand the discomfort of resisting the pressure to conform or obey an authority figure. They are less confident and have more of a need for social approval.
Supporting evidence for the idea that having an internal locus of control helps resist obedience.
Holland. Did a repeat of the Milgram study and found that 37% of those with an internal locus of control refused to carry on to the higher shock level, and only 23% of those with an external locus of control refused to continue until the end. This shows that having an internal locus of control helps individuals resist the pressure to obey authority.
Challenging evidence for locus of control.
Twinge at Al analyse data from obedience studies over 40 years and found that people have become more likely to resist obedience and more external in their locus of control. If resistance to obedience was linked to locus of control, we’d expect to see the opposite. The shift in locus of control might reflect a changing society where it is clear that many things are out of our control.
What has research shown about locus of control and conformity due to normative social influence?
Those with an internal locus of control were less likely to conform and want to be liked and accepted within a group compared to those with an external locus of control. This supports the idea that having an internal locus of control is linked to resisting conformity.
What has research shown about locus of control and conformity due to informational social influence?
Locus of control doesn’t have any link with resisting conformity due to information or processes where people agree with the majority if they thought they were correct. This suggests that locus of control doesn’t always increase resistance to conformity, so it is only a partial explanation.
How does social support help us resist conformity?
If there’s one person in the group who Is not also in agreement, it gives support to an individual who has a different opinion to the group. This occurs even if the opinion is not the same as the other individuals. The other person break some unanimity of the group and offer the potential for a different opinion. This legitimates ways of thinking that gives an individual confidence to act upon their own judgement.
Supporting evidence for social support for a resistance of conformity.
In Asche’s research, conformity rates fell from 32% to 5% when one of the Confederates gave the right answer. Rates also fell to 9% when a Confederate gave a different, incorrect answer. For the strongest social support, the correct answer is given from the person in the first position in the group. If the dissenting Confederate began to agree with the others again, so did the participant. Conformity is dependent on having an ally who also resists.
What do the findings from Asche’s research suggest about social support and resisting conformity?
Resistance to conformity is heavily dependent on having an ally in the group who also resists.
Why does social support help us resist obedience?
Having social support through witnessing another person take a stand and refusing to obey can help an individual to resist the pressure to obey. The disobedient person can act as a role model, and having an ally can help an individual cope with the awkwardness involved in against the social conventions of obeying a person with legitimate authority.
How is the explanation of social support and resistance of obedience supported by Milgram’s research?
One disobedient Confederate refused to continue with electric shocks. This caused obedience rates to fall from 65 to 10%, giving maximum voltage. This supports the social support explanation of resisting obedience.
How is the social support explanation of resisting obedience supported by real life incidents?
A group of German women protested in Berlin against the Gestapo who were holding 2000 Jewish men prisoner. They were ordered to disperse and were threatened. The woman refused to obey and continue to make their demands. Being with other disobedient role models enabled the women to resist the pressure to obey where they would normally be reluctant to show dissent. This caused the men to be released.
What are the three processes involved in minority influence?
Consistency, commitment and flexibility.
What is consistency?
Unchanging interview is more likely to influence the majority. And all members of the minority must propose the same message.
Example of consistency.
All members of an environmental group should not drive cars and should instead use public transport, cycle or walk.
What supporting evidence is there for the role of consistency?
Moscovici study.
What is commitment?
When the majority is confronted with someone with self-confidence and dedication to take a popular stand and refuses to back own, they may assume that he or she has a point. The use of dramatic and dangerous ways to draw attention to their views and demonstrate their commitment to the cause.
Supporting evidence for the role of consistency.
Hogg and Vaughan. Minorities are likely to exert an influence on the majority if seeing is acting from a committed principle and if they’ve made a personal sacrifice.
What is flexibility?
If a minority appears compromising, they are likely to be seen as less extreme, more moderate, cooperative and reasonable.
Example of flexibility.
Environmentalist should acknowledge that some individuals living in remote and rural areas need a car to get to work.
Supporting evidence for the role of flexibility
A simulated jury. Confederate one refused to alter his position and had no effect on the majority opinion, whereas Confederate 2 was prepared to shift a little towards the majority, was able to influence others to agree.
Moscovici study procedures.
172 female participants were told they were taking part in a colour perception task. They were placed into groups of six and showing 36 slides with varying shades of blue. Participants had to say out loud the colour of each slide. Two out of 6 in the group were Confederates in condition 1. The Confederates said that all slides were green, but in condition to they said that 24 slides are green and 12 were blue.
Findings of Moscovici study.
In the consistent condition, participants agreed on 8.2% of the trials, whereas in the inconsistent condition, participants agreed on 1.25% of the trials.
Moscovici study conclusion.
A consistent minority is 6.95% more effective than an inconsistent minority. Consistency is an important factor in minority influence.
How has Moscovici study been criticised for being artificial?
In real life, minorities are often very passionate about their views, unlike the Confederates from the study. Changing the majority’s viewpoints takes many years, whereas the study took place over a short period of time and the study can’t provide an accurate reflection of minority groups in the real world.
What is social change?
Whole societies alter their attitudes and behaviour. The majority of people in a society adopt new ways of behaving and thinking.
Two examples of where the minority has created social change.
Suffragettes and giving women the right to vote. And attitudes towards homosexuality.
How does minority influence create social change?
1- drawing attention
2- consistency
3- deeper processing
4- augmentation principle
5- snowball effect
6- social cryptomnesia
Challenging evidence for the role played by minority influence in creating social change.
Its majority influence that may create deeper processing if you do not share their views. This is because we like to believe that other people share our views and thinking the same ways as us. When we find out a majority believe something different, then we are forced to think long and hard about their arguments and reasoning. This means that a central element of the process of minority influence has been challenged and may be incorrect.
One practical application of research into the role played by minority influence in creating social change.
If minorities want to create social change, they need to avoid behaving in ways that reinforce stereotypes that may be off putting for the majority.
Give two everyday examples where conformity has created social change.
Reducing litter by putting everyone else does on bins. And signs saying most guests reuse their towels to decrease laundry demands in hotels.
How does conformity create social change?
Due to normative social influence, people change their behaviour to fit in with others,
Evidence that supports the role played by conformity in creating social change.
In Montana State University, a programme was used to bring about social change in young adults drinking and driving. The message was - most Montana young adults don’t drink and drive. This caused a 13% reduction in drinking and exposure to social norms led to a social change which supports the role of normative social influence in social change.
Example of evidence that challenges the role played by conformity and creating social change.
In a similar campaign to the Montana State University programme on 14 college sites a postal survey campaign was implemented to reduce alcohol use in students. They compared perceptions of drinking norms and personal drinking behaviour at the time and three years after. They found there was no reduction in perceptions of student drinking and reports of drinking were the same.
define the term duration
The length of time information can be held in memory
Sensory register duration
up to 2 seconds - Sperling
short term memory duration
18-30 seconds (Peterson & Peterson)
long term memory duration
May last a lifetime - Bahrick
define capacity
a measure of the amount of information that can be stored in memory
define coding
the way information is modified/converted to when it is stored
sensory register capacity
75% of data it is presented with (Peterson & Peterson)
short term memory capacity
7 +/- 2 - Jacobs
long term memory capacity
unlimited - no way of measuring
sensory register coding
modality free
short term memory coding
acoustic - conrad & baddeley
long term memory coding
semantically - baddeley
3 assumptions of the multistore model of memory
there are 3 separate stores- sensory register, ltm and stm
each store is unitary and cant be subdivided
information is transferred via rehearsal
what is meant by rehearsal?
repetition over and over again
if this doesn’t occur, information is forgotten and lost from short term memory via decay
example of rehearsal
using flashcards to repetitively revise content will ensure info is transferred to ltm
how is information passed from the sensory register to stm
it must be paid attention to
Peterson and Peterson researched…
short term memory duration
Peterson and Peterson procedures
P’s given a nonsense triad (NTD), P’s count down in 3s for either 0,3,6,9,12,15 or 18s. P’s asked to recall triad they were given.
Peterson and Peterson findings/conclusion
@ 3s: 80% correct recall, 30% @ 9s & 10% @ 18s.
some people can retain info for 30s (max STM duration)
Jacobs researched…
short term memory capacity
Jacobs procedure
letters/digits shown every 0.5s. P’s asked to recall them in correct order. Started @ items, more added 1 at a time until failure. repeated for an average digit span.
Jacobs findings/conclusion
average digit span = 5-9 items
Conrad researched…
short term memory coding
Conrad procedures
P’s shown 6 random consonants & asked to write letters in order. List of letters were either acoustically similar (T,V,P) or different (F,J,R)
Conrad findings
Acoustically similar letters were more difficult to recall - STM uses an acoustic code.
Bahrick researched…
long term memory duration
Bahrick procedure
yearbooks of 392 graduates (17-74yrs) traced. Time since graduation 2 weeks-57yrs. 130 pictures from each yearbook selected for either free recall of names, recognition of names, recognition of pictures, matching names to pictures & naming pictures.
Bahrick findings
Free recall of names: 50% accuracy @ 3mth, 20% @ 40+yrs
Recognition of names, recognition of pictures & matching names to pictures: 85-90% accuracy for all
Naming pictures: 70% accuracy @ 3mth, 60% @ 15yr & 20% @ 40+yrs
Bahrick conclusion
LTM may last a lifetime but access depends on how a person tries to remember. Recognition is superior to info recall.
Baddeley research…
long term memory coding
Baddeley procedure
70 young servicemen asked to recall 1 of 4 word lists in correct order. 1) acoustically similar 2) acoustically different 3) semantically similar 4) semantically different
Baddeley findings/conclusions
No recall difference between acoustically similar & different
accuracy of semantic similar (55%) < accuracy of semantically different (85%)
LTM uses semantic code
HM study aim
Scoville performed surgery on the then 27-year-old H.M. to cure him of his epileptic seizures.
HM study method
Removal of hippocampus
HM study results
Impaired memory: unable to produce long term memory - lost his memory for events that had happened after his surgery
STM unaffected
HM study conclusion
Memory is not one unitary store as STM still functioned.
supporting evidence for the ideal that stm and ltm are separate
HM case study, hippocampus removed, impared memory
HM no longer able to produce long term memories but short term was unaffected
supports theories that all stored are separate and different
supporting evidence for idea that stm and ltm are different
Jacobs found stm capacity to be 5-9 items but ltm’s is thought to be unlimited
baddeley found stm codes accoustically but coding in ltm is scemantic
shows stores are different
Multistore Model of Memory
a model proposing that information flows from our senses through three storage levels in memory: sensory, short-term, and long-term
MSM practical applications
helps students revise - need to rehearse info
helps teaching - teachers regularly revisit topics to continue rehearsal
the ideas put forward have been useful in the real world
evidence that ltm and stm aren’t unitary
consist of multiple components which are able to process different types of information: working memory model and tulvings divisions of ltm
evidence that rehearsal is not always needed for transfer to ltm
we are sometimes able to remember unrehearsed memories but unable to recall rehearsed memories.
Hyde & Jenkins found no difference in the number of words recalled between group that rehearsed and group that didnt - shows rehearsal isnt as important as model claims
episodic ltm
responsible for storing information about events (episodes) that we have personally experienced in our lives - places people and objects
requires conscious though - declarative
episodic ltm example
memory of our first day at school
episodic ltm location
hippocampus
semantic ltm
responsible for storing knowledge of the world - meaning of words and general knowledge
conscious effort required to recall - declarative
semantic memory example
london is the capital city of england
semantic ltm location
temporal and frontal lobes
procedural ltm
responsible for knowing how to do things (skills)
no conscious effort to remember - implicit
procedural memory example
knowing how to ride a bike
procedural ltm location
motor cortex and cerebellum
difference between declarative and implicit memory
declarative require a conscious effort to be remembered (episodic and semantic)
implicit memories don’t require this effort (procedural)
supporting evidence for types of LTM
brain scans show different parts of the brain are active when different ltm tasks are performed: episodic=hippocampus, semantic=temporal+frontal , procedural=cerebellum+motor cortex. this shows tulving was correct in suggesting different types of ltm
case study supporting evidence for types of ltm
clive wearing - some procedural but impaired episodic
vicari et al - some impaired episodic but intact semantic
types of ltm practical applications
helps healthcare professionals treat the elderly with cognitive decline. they are able to isolate specific types of LTM that are in decline and devise strategies to improve
challenging evidence for types of ltm
challenges the distinction between episodic and semantic memory. episodic memories are needed to form semantic memories as we aquire knowledge from personal experiences - they together represent delarative memory
suggests only 2 types of ltm rather than 3 types
limitation of types of ltm: use of case studies on brain damage patients
unique participants - may not be able to generalise to a healthy brain
cant say that people without brain damage have the same ltm divisions
define reciprocity
Infant and caregiver perform turn taking behaviour like a two-way conversation
reciprocity example
caregiver smiles at the Infant and infant responds by smiling back
define interactional synchrony
caregiver and infant behaviour become synchronised in direct Response to each other
Meltzoff and Moore procedure
controlled observation where an adult model displayed different facial expressions and hand movements. was this occurred the child was giving a dummy to prevent responses. when the dummy was removed the infants response was filmed and judged by an independent Observer.
why is it difficult to draw firm conclusions about the role of caregiver interactions in attachments
an infants behaviour may not be deliberate as they can’t communicate to tell us whether it is or isn’t on purpose this means we can’t be certain that infants are engaging in caregiver infant interactions. can’t show cause and effect
example of interactional synchrony
caregiver hums and infant rocks in time with caregiver hums and infant rocks in time with the tune
how can it be argued that research into caregiver-infant interactions is scientific
there are often controlled procedures film from multiple angles this means fine behaviours can be observed and analysed to improve the accuracy of conclusions
explain the procedures of schaffer and Emersons research
visited infants and their homes every month for a year and again at 18 months mother’s kept a diary detailing instances of social referencing strangers anxiety and separation anxiety
Schaffer and Emerson research participants
60 babies from working-class families in Glasgow
what are the four stages of attachment
asocial
indiscriminate
specific
multiple
what are the key features of the asocial stage
they respond to humans and objects in the same way but have a preference for face and eyes
when does the asocial stage occur
0 to 6 weeks
what are the key features of the indiscriminate stage
prefer humans to objects are comforted easily by anyone and can distinguish between people
when does the indiscriminate stage occur
6-weeks to 6 months
when does the indiscriminate stage occur
6-weeks to 6 months
key features of the specific stage
instant forms of specific attachment with a primary caregiver and shows separation anxiety when the primary caregiver isn’t present. infant is also not easily comforted by anyone other than the primary caregiver as they look for to them for Comfort and protection
when does the specific stage occur
7 months +
key features of multiple attachment stage
entrance forms attachments to multiple other people like siblings and grandparents