The psychology of individual differences

Question 1

Describe the context and aim of Rosenhan’s study

Answer 1

• Ruth Benedict, 1934, suggested that normality and abnormality are not universal
• Situational or dispositional: Do the salient characteristics that lead to diagnoses reside in the patients themselves or in the environments and contexts in which observers find them?
• Hypothesis: Psychiatrists cannot reliably tell the difference between the sane and the insane

Question 2

Describe the method and pseudopatients in Rosenhan’s study

Answer 2

• Participant observation
• 3 women, 5 men
• 1 psychology student in his 20s, 3 psychologists, 1 pediatrician, 1 psychiatrist, 1 painter, 1 housewife
• All used pseudonyms
• Those in mental health professions alleged another occupation (avoid special attentions)
• Presence and nature of research unknown to hospital staff (except Rosenhan, known to admin and chief pscyhologist)

Question 3

Describe the setting of Rosenhan’s study

Answer 3

• 12 hospitals across five different US states
• East and West coasts
• Some old/shabby, some new
• Well staffed and under-staffed
• One private, one university funded, others were state/federal funded
• Can be generalised

Question 4

Describe the procedure of Rosenhan’s 1^st study

Answer 4

• Called for appointment
• Admissions office - hearing unfamiliar, unclear voices of same sex saying “empty”, “hollow”, “thud”
• No cases of existential psychoses had existed
• Falsified name, vocation and employment; no further altercations of person/history - not pathological
• Upon admission, ceased simulating symptoms
• Responded to instructions, said they were fine
• Wrote observations secretly at first, then openly as no one much cared

Question 5

Describe the diagnoses given to the pseudopatients

Answer 5

• 11 admitted with schizophrenia
• 1 admitted with manic depression
• All were discharged ‘in remission’ - implied effects on furture job prospects

Question 6

Briefly describe the experience of the pseudopatients in the mental hospitals

Answer 6

• Average stay 19 days (7-52 range)
• Total 2100 pills - variety of medications for patients presenting identical symptoms
• Nurses/doctors misinterpreted behaviour
  
  • writing - pathological? Not even a symptom!
  • pacing - nervous? No, bored
  • waiting for lunch - oral-acquisitive? Not much else to do
• Powerlessness and depersonalisation
• Abusive behaviour

Question 7

Describe the staff-patient interactions and other experiences showing depersonalisation in Rosenhan’s study

Answer 7

• Attendants spent 11.3% of time outside of glassed quarters ‘cage’ (3-52% range) - strict segregation
• Physicians did not answer/barely listened to questions asked by pseudopatients
• Verbal and occasional physical abuse - stopped when other staff members came
• Staff did not care that patients rejected medication as long as they behaved
• Staff at top of hierarchy have less to do with patients
• No privacy e.g. toilets had no doors
• 35/118 real patients suspicious, none of the staff were

Question 8

How did the nurses respond to the questions asked by pseudopatients in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 8

• stops and talks 0.5%
• pauses and chats 1.5%
• makes eye contact 10%
• continues, looking the other way 88%

This involves a situational explanation. Inmates are mentally ill and so cannot communicate/are non-people

Question 9

Describe the procedure for Rosenhan’s 2^nd study

Answer 9

• Research and teaching hospital
• Informed that in the following 3 months, one or more pseudopatients would attempt admission
• Staff rated each patient on likelihood of being a pseudopatient
• 10-point scale - 1/2 high confidence the patient is a pseudopatient

Question 10

Describe the results of Rosenhan’s second study

Answer 10

• 193 patients admitted
• 41 high confidence
• 23 suspected by at least one psychiatrist
• 19 suspected by one psychiatrist and one other staff member
• No actual pseudopatients were sent by Rosenhan

Question 11

What explanations did Rosenhan suggest for the experience of mental hospitalisation?

Answer 11

• More inclined to Type 2 error - safer to diagnose healthy as sick than vice versa
• Situation of hospital determines assumptions made by staff of patients
• Stickiness of psychodiagnostic labels - colours others’ perceptions of patient
• Depersonalisation as staff did not want anything to do with patients - worsens mental condition

Question 12

Evaluate Rosenhan’s study

Answer 12

• Generalisation: yes; range of pseudopatient and hospital characteristics
• Reliability: questionable; similar results for 12 hospitals, similar procedure means can be replicated; however, observation may not be reliable
• Validity: low; changes in the DSM makes study outdates
• Ecological validity: quite high; real hospitals and accounts of real patient behaviour; however, pseudopatients cannot tell what real patients feel
• Ethics: no; deception, no consent, no right to withdraw, no personal debriefing; however, confidential
• Usefulness: high; led to re-evaluation of diagnosis criteria, reveals danger of psychodiagnostic labelling

Question 13

Define

multiple personality disorder (MPD)

Answer 13

A rare dissociative disorder in which two or more personalities with distinct memories and behavior patterns apparently exist in one individual.

Question 14

Describe Thigpen & Cleckley’s subject

Answer 14

• Eve White (aka Christine Sizemore)
• 25 years old
• Married (unhappily)
• A 4-year-old daughter
• Eldest of three sisters (twin sisters)
• Telephone operator

Question 15

Describe Thigpen & Cleckley’s method

Answer 15

• Logitudinal case study (14 months)
  
  • MPD is rare (so studying one individual is realistic)
  • wanted to study MPD, Eve was an interesting case (so could collect in depth data/understand the source of her problem and help her - action research)
  • provides basic information for further research on MPD
• Hypnosis initially to access Eve Black, and to retrieve memories
• Self-report: unstructured interviews (approx. 100 hours total) to assess the personalities
  
  • may have demand characteristics and researcher bias

Question 16

Briefly describe the case history of Eve White

Answer 16

• Complained of severe headaches and blackouts
• Denied buyinig expensive clothes which her husband had found
• Letter sent with different handwriting, Eve did not remember sending it
• Admitted to occasionally hearing an imaginary voice (however, no typical schizoid behaviours)
• Apperance of Eve Black after a severe headache
• After 8 months, no more headaches/blackouts
• Return of symptoms, now experienced by Eve Black as well
• Appearance of Jane, a more balanced individual

Question 17

Describe the tests used by Thigpen and Cleckley

Answer 17

Psychometric tests

• Wechler-Bellevue intelligence scale
• Wechsler Memory Scale

Projective tests (may not be valid)

• Drawings of human figures
• Rorschach (ink blot)

Electroencephalographic studies (completely scientific, so valid)

• EEG for all three personalities and for passing between them

Question 18

Describe the personality of Eve White

Answer 18

• Simple, demure, retiring
• Industrious and able worker
• Devoted to her child
• Caring, uncritical of others

Test results:

• IQ 110 (higher than Black)(‘anxiety and tenseness interfere’)
• Memory function far above her IQ
• Rorschach: constriction, anxiety, OCD traits, conflict & anxiety in roles as wife and mother
• Repression; rigid and unable to deal with hostility

Question 19

Describe the personality of Eve Black

Answer 19

• Shrewd, vain, egocentric
• Mischievous
• Hedonistic, irresponsible
• Coarsened, ‘discultered’ voice
• Whim-like attitudes/passions
• Attractive, sexy, provocative
• Amusing and likeable

Relationship/attitudes with Eve White

• Regards her as silly, and her love for her daughter ‘corny’
• Insists she can erase her memory
• Allows White to take punishment for her actions

Test results

• IQ 104 (lower than White)(‘superficiality and slight indifference as to achievement’)
• Memory function on same level as IQ
• Hysterical tendencies
• Rorschach record healthier than White
• Regression

Question 20

Describe the results of the EEG performed on the MPD patient

Answer 20

• Tenseness Black > White > Jane
• Black’s alpha rate increased - associated with psychopathic personalities
• Restlessness and generalised muscle tension in Black
• Alpha rhythm frequently blocked for several seconds during and following transposition
• Blocking most pronounced from White to Black, not at all in Black to White

Question 21

Evaluate Thigpen and Cleckley’s study

Answer 21

• Generalisation: no; rare, one patient
• Reliability: low; cannot replicate
• Validity: questionable; could they have been conned by an actress? EEG confirms no; projective tests may not be valid; demand characteristics and researcher bias
• Ecological validity: high; real patient
• Ethics: no; confidential at first but then movie rights were sold without permission; harm may have been done through hypnosis (22 personalities were later experienced); unethical to assign one personality dominance
• Usefulness: high; rare disorder, in-depth qualitative data, can be used to diagnose

Question 22

Describe the E-S theory as in Billington’s study

Answer 22

• Two core psychological dimensions or cognitive styles: empathising (E) and systemising (S)
• Females on average have a stronger drive to empathise, whilst males on average have a stronger drive to systemise
• Irrespective of sex, if S>E this profile leads them into disciplines requiring an analytical style to deal with rule-based phenomena (e.g. science/maths), and if E>S into humanities

Question 23

Define the cognitive style:

empathising

Answer 23

The drive and ability to identify another’s mental states and to respond to these with one of a range of appropriate emotions.

• cognitive component: understanding another’s thoughts and feelings (theory of mind)
• affective component: an emotional response that arises as a result of the comprehension of another individual’s emotional state

Question 24

Define the cognitive style:

systemising

Answer 24

The drive and ability to analyse the rules underlying a system, in order to predict its behaviour.

• the ‘system’ is analysed in terms of an INPUT - OPERATION - OUTPUT principle
• ability is associated with a preference for local detail and an ability to ignore Gestalt perceptual distractors in a visual field

Question 25

What was the background and aims of Billington’s study?

Answer 25

• Disparity in performance of males and females in maths and science from an early age
• More men in scientific thinking careers, more women in social skills careers
• Aims:
  
  • To retest the sex ratio in physical sciences and humanities
  • To test if males show the S>E profile and if females show the E>S profile
  • To test if physical science students show the S>E profile and if humanities students show the E>S profile
  • To test if cognitive style is a better predictor of subject enrolment than sex

Question 26

Describe Billington’s method and sample

Answer 26

• Natural experiment with self-report questionnaires
  
  • ​IV/DVs correspond with aims; test results
• Independent groups design
  
  • ​subjects are male/female and take science/humanities
• 415 students
  
  • 212 females (108 science, 104 humanities)
  • 203 males (160 science, 43 humanities)
  • 268 total physical science students
  • 147 total humanities students
  • 87.7% right-handed, 10.6% left-handed, 1.7% ambidextrous
• Recruited via email and adverts in university
• Prize draw incentive
• Subjects with mental illness excluded

Question 27

Describe the procedure used in Billington’s study, and state any controls implemented

Answer 27

• Online, secure uni website
• Enter basic info (sex, DoB, handedness, diagnoses of medical conditions, educational level & degree type)
• Two questionnaires and two performance tasks
• Complete each only once, in any order
• Can return to site (no need to do all at once)

Controls:

• Same tests
• Order not fixed ∴ no order effects
• Tested only once to avoid learning effects

Question 28

Describe the questionnaires used in Billington’s study

Answer 28

• SQ-R
  
  • revised - original had 40 items
  • 75 items (more reliable), max score 150
  • assesses drive & preference to systemise
  • better psychometric properties - valid + reliable
  • includes sex-neutral items - reduced bias
• EQ
  
  • 40 items, max score 80
  • assesses drive & preference to empathise
  • both cognitive (“I am good at predicting what someone will do”) and affective (“I usually stay emotionally detached while watching a film”) components tested
  • 4-point scale (definitely agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, definitely disagree)
  • Half the items reversed scored to avoid response bias
• ‘brain type’ calculated, D score indicates difference between SQ-EQ scores
• • 2.5-35%: Type E / S
• 35-65%: Type B

Question 29

Describe the performance tasks used in Billington’s study

Answer 29

• FC-EFT (forced-choice embedded figures test)
  
  • max score 24
  • piloted with items from original EFT, high correlation
  • two possible answers, press keys to select
  • 12 pairs of diagrams, find the small black and white shape
  • automatically moves on in 50s
• Eyes Test
  
  • max score 72
  • choose one of four words
  • keys to select (1, 9, Q, I)
  • automatically moves on in 20s
• one point for each correct answer
• bonus point if in fastest 25% for that item

Question 30

Describe the results and conclusions of Billington’s study

Answer 30

1. Sex ratio
   
   • 59.1% science students were male
   • 70.1% humanities students were female
2. Cognitive style and sex are related
   
   • 66% males S or Extreme S compared to 28.8% females
   • 36.8% females E or Extreme E compared to 10.3% males
   • Females scored significantly higher on Eyes test
   • No significant sex difference on FC-EFT
3. Cognitive style is a better predictor than sex
   
   • 56.3% science students S or Extreme S compared to 29.9% humanities students
   • 41.5% humanities students E or Extreme E compared to 14.2% science students
   • Physical science students better at FC-EFT, worse at Eyes test
   • Logistic regression - 71.3% predictions accurate
     
     • best to worst predictors: brain type, FC-EFT, Eyes test, sex

Question 31

Evaluate Billington’s study

Answer 31

• Generalisation: no, all Cambridge students
• Reliability: high, replicable, questionnaires are standardised psychometric tests
• Validity: high, tests standardised; low, no standardised environment, different people could have taken tests under one name
• Ecological validity: low, questionnaires
• Ethics: yes, no harm/deception, consent
• Usefulness: yes, shows sex is not main factor, indicates different learning methods for E/S, however may add social pressure in suggesting females less inclined to S

Question 32

Define

body dismorphic disorder (BDD)

and list its symptoms

Answer 32

A psychological disorder in which a person becomes obsessed with imaginary defects in their appearance

• Preoccupation with physical appearance with extreme self-consciousness
• Frequent mirror gazing, or the opposite, avoidance of mirrors altogether
• Strong belief of having an abnormality or defect in appearance that makes them ugly
• Belief that others take special notice of their appearance in a negative way
• Avoidance of social situations
• Excessive grooming, such as hair plucking or skin picking, or excessive exercise in an unsuccessful effort to improve the flaw
• Reluctance to appear in pictures

Symptoms of BDD often overlap with some symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder and anorexia nervosa, and many develop depression due to their unhappiness with their image.

Question 33

Describe the background and aims of Veale’s study on BDD

Answer 33

• Patient reported 6 hours staring at himself in front of a series of mirrors
• Mirror gazing occurs in about 80% of BDD patients
• Compared to OCD - however, mirror gazing is more difficult to resist and doesn’t lessen the anxiety, patient reported feeling worse
• Aims: provide a better understanding of the psychopathology of mirror gazing for use to formulate new strategies in therapy, and to generate hypotheses for further studies
  
  • ​What did the behaviour consist of?
  • What was the function of the behaviour?
  • What maintained the behaviour even though the patient felt worse after mirror gazing?

Question 34

Describe Veale’s method

Answer 34

• Self report questionnaire
  
  • ‘interested in the feelings…over the past month’
  • ​both open- and closed- question types
  • Likert scale
• Pilot study was done previously, revealing two types of mirror gazing
  
  • long session
  • short session
• Sample (matched pair design):
  
  • ​52 BDD patients who reported mirror gazing (self-selected)
  • 55 controls recruited from personal contacts (opportunity sample)
  • Age and sex matched

Question 35

List the 8 areas questioned in Veale’s ‘mirror gazing questionnaire’

Answer 35

1. Length of time mirror gazing (long session, short session, estimated maximum)
2. Motivation before looking in a mirror (Likert)
3. Focus of attention - internal or external (9 point)
4. Distress before and after mirror gazing and after resisting mirror gazing (1-10)
5. Behaviour in front of a mirror (% of time spent on listed activities)
6. Type of light preferred (scale natural-artificial)
7. Types of reflective surfaces
8. Mirror avoidance - what types & situations

Question 36

Describe the results of Veale’s study

Answer 36

• Average time mirror gazing:
  
  • BDD: 72.5min, control: 21.3min
• No. of short sessions:
  
  • BDD: 14.6, control: 3.9 but more time spent
• Motivation before looking in mirror
  
  • BDD more likely to agree with statements
• Focus of attention in mirror:
  
  • BDD: internal impression: -0.49, control: -2.2
• Distress before/after:
  
  • BDD more distressed (esp. after long session)
  • no sig. incr. in distress after resisting urge to gaze
• Behaviour in front of mirror:
  
  • BDD compare mirror with image in mind, try to see something different in the mirror
• Light preference:
  
  • no sig. diff.
• Reflective surfaces:
  
  • BDD more likely to use a series of mirror with different profiles for long sessions
  • BDD and control use shop windows
  • BDD use wide variety of surfaces e.g. car mirrors, cutlery, table tops, watch faces, CDs
• Mirror avoidance:
  
  • BDD sometimes too distressed, so avoid
  • some BDD only avoid certain mirrors
  • types of selective avoidance:
    
    1. specific defect avoidance
    2. ‘unsafe’ mirrors
    3. no mirrors in public - too distressing
    4. only obscured mirrors

Question 37

List the conclusions presented by Veale about mirror gazing in BDD patients

Answer 37

1. Mirror gazing is a series of idiosynchratic and complex safety behaviours designed to prevent a feared outcome (social rejection, disgust)
2. Patients have an eternal hope they will look different / feel comfortable with appearance
3. Patients are uncertain about body image and demand to know how they look
4. Believe they will feel worse if they resist mirror gazing
5. Driven by a desire to camouflage their appearance / excessively groom / mental cosmetic surgery
6. Focus on internal impression; selectively attend to an unstable body image

Question 38

What goals did Veale encourage BDD patients to attain?

Answer 38

1. Use mirrors at a slight distance / incorporate most of their body
2. Deliberately focus attention on reflection, not internal impression of feelings
3. Only use mirror for agreed function for limited time
4. Use variety or mirrors and lights (not just ‘trust’)
5. Focus on whole of face/body, not specific area
6. Suspend judgement about appearance, distance from automatic thoughts of being ugly
7. Not to use mirrors that magnify reflection
8. Not to use ambiguous reflections
9. Not to use when having urge, but try delay response

Question 39

Evaluate Veale’s study

Answer 39

• Generalisation: uncertain; were age and sex representative? culture?
• Reliability: high; matched pairs so less participant variables, standardised questionnaire
• Validity: low; demand characteristics & social desirability when answering questionnaire, Likert scale with statements not reversed; however both quanti- and qualitative data is rich
• Ecological validity: high; real BDD patients all diagnosed according to DSM-IV
• Ethics: yes; informed consent, confidential; however questionnaire may have been triggering
• Usefulness: high; can be used to treat patients, new studies can be designed