reductionism - classic studies

Question 1

reduction in explaining behaviour in social classic study

Answer 1

Sherif did not look into factors that could affect prejudice e.g. cultural differences.

He solely focused on competition increasing levels of prejudice.

He used an American sample which is not representative of non-western cultures.

Sherif simplified aggression to physical and verbal aggression HOWEVER, field experiment so less reductionist than a lab experiment.

Question 2

reduction in explaining behaviour in cognitive classic study

Answer 2

baddeley used a list of words for pp’s to learn as a measure of LTM which is not an everyday normal behaviour so lacks task validity.

He used a lab controlled experiment which is objective measure of memory recall. HOWEVER, there is more to memory than just recall of words.

Question 3

reduction in explaining behaviour in biological classic study

Answer 3

Raine’s PET scans of NGRI offenders only uses evidence of neurotransmitter activity as an an explanation of human behaviour and so fails to consider environmental factors e.g. SLT

However, PET scans are an objective measure of brain activity.

Question 4

reduction in explaining behaviour in learning classic study

Answer 4

Watson and Rayner only looked at one type of conditioning (classical) and failed to consider operant or social learning.

They looked at the stimulus seeing the effect on response which is not following in the cognitive processes between the stimulus + response and so is reductive.

Watson and Rayner looked at specific phobia of white fluffy objects so not applicable to all types of phobias (e.g. not situational phobias like claustrophobia)

Question 5

reduction in explaining behaviour in clinical classic study

Answer 5

Rosenhan simplified the symptoms of schizophrenia into 3 simple words: “empty, hollow, and thud”

Psychiatrists were likely using the DSM, which is reductionist because the psychiatrists use a symptom list which reduces the disorders down to specific criteria.

Rosenhan’s observational interactions overlooked the internal perceptions of the pseudo-patients e.g. objective data over subjective experiences.

Reliance on quantitative data is reductive in examining mental heath behaviour. Lack of qualitative data makes Rosenhan’s study lack depth and detail, unable to tackle the “WHY” aspect of his study.