Year 12 Mock Flashcards
What does the learning theory believe
Babies are born a blank slate. Food is the basic idea behind attachment.
Who created the learning theory and when
Dollard and Miller (1950)
Operant conditioning in the learning theory
Baby cries and gets fed. The baby continues to cry whenever they want feeding (positive reinforcement)
What is the primary reinforcer and who is secondary reinforcer in the learning theory
Primary reinforcer - milk
Secondary reinforcer - mother
Limitation of the learning theory
Attachment is not solely based off food. Harlow (1958) conducted a study based off rhesus monkeys to investigate if food or comfort was better for attachment. Harlow found attachment was greater when the primary reinforcer offered comfortbality and safety rather than food. This was an animal study however and hard to generalise to human infants.
What does Bowlbys monotropic theory argue
That attachment is innate
1st stage of Bowlby monotropic theory of attachment
Social releasers. Social behaviour elicits caregiving leading to attachment.
2nd stage of Bowlby monotropic theory of attachment
Critical period. Time frame where babies have innate drive to form an attachment
3rd stage of Bowlby monotropic theory of attachment
Monotropy. Infants have 1 special emotional bond. Infants also form many secondary attachments to form a large safety net
Classical conditions for learning theory
Strength of monotropic theory
Emp evidence to show attachment is innate. Meltzoff and Moore found intersectional synchrony at 3 days old. Interaction also synchrony helps form attachment supporting Bowlbys idea of attachment being innate.
Limitation of Bowlbys theory of attachment
Learning theory is counter argument. Learning theory states that babies are born a blank slate and nothing is innate. Learning theory states babies learn through operant and classical conditioning through the motivation of food and hunger
Conformity using research (Asch)
Conducted line study where ppts asked to complete an unambiguous task in a group setting. 37% conformity in his original trials. Asch further investigated 3 main factors affecting conformity. Group size, task difficulty, unanimity. Task difficulty caused the study to be more ambiguous and therefore Asch found higher conformity when the task was harder due to ISI.
Conformity using research (Zimbardo)
Aimed to investigate how people would conform to social roles by simulating a prison environment with guards and prisoners. Arrested 24 ppts and random allocated them to a prisoner or guard. Study length was 2 weeks but lasted 6 days. He found that prisoners became submissive and obedient to the guards and therefore they showed NSI as they desired to fit into their role.
Strength of Zimabrdo research
There is mirrored findings in every day life. Abu Ghraib prison (2003) was a notorious prison in Iraq. The prison was taken by US soldiers. These soldiers had a higher social role then the prisoners and therefore acted brutally to the prisoners. This increases the validity of Zimbardos study as previously criticised for being a simulated environment.
Limitation of Zimbardos study
Zimbardo took part in the experiment. He was prison warden. This caused researcher bias as he acted on his role more than a researcher. Fromm (1973) found only 1/3 of the guards acted brutally but Zimbardo focused on then to get the findings he desired. This shows not all ppts showed high levels of NSI but Zimbardo made it seem like they did which decreases internal validity.
Limitation of Aschs study (pop)
Lacked population validity. 123 male undergraduate students. Bond and Smith (1996) replicated the study. They found a significant relationship demonstrating conformity is greater in some cultures. Therefore Aschs findings can only be cautiously generalised to the population
Limitation of Aschs study MR
Low mundane realism. The line task was unusual and is not needed in every day life. The artificial setting of the lab could also cause ppts to find the aim of the study and create demand characteristics. Both factors lower the ecological validity of Aschs study.
What is systematic desensitisation
Uses counter conditioning to help patients unlearn their phobia. Patient creates a fear hierarchy from least - most anxiety-inducing. Patient is taught relaxation techniques and slowly moves up the hierarchy and relaxes at each stage before moving up. They do this until they are relaxed at the oringially most feared anxiety. The phobia has then worn off
What is flooding
Flooding exposes the individual to the most anxiety inducing stimulus immediately. The patient is unable to avoid the phobia and through continuous exposure the patient becomes tired and anxiet begins to wear off. Anxiety is time limited and the fear eventually subsides.
Strength of systematic desensitisation
Evidence describing effectiveness. McGrath et al (1960) found 75% effectiveness rate of systematic desensitisation. Showed clear effectiveness of when the patient went face to face with the phobia rather than through imagining.
Limitation of systematic desensitisation
Not effective in treating all phobias. Personal experienced phobias are not treated well with systematic desensitation. Some psychologists believe certain phobias have evolutionary survival benefit and is not a result of learning.
Limitation of flooding (trauma)
High trauma as shows high anxiety. Wolpe (1969) recalled patient needing hospitalisation due to the intense anxiousness. Although it is not unethical as ppts consent , many people leave the study making it a waste of time and money and also worsening the phobia
Limitation of both flooding and systematic desensitisation
There may be symptom substitution. 1 phobia may be treated but another may appear. The underlying cause of the phobia may not be treated therefore it is a criticism to behaviourists who claim behavioural treatment is ideal for phobias.
Limitation of WMM
Concept of central executive is too vague. Eslinger and Damasio (1985) studied EVR who had cerebral tumor removed. EVR did well on tests requiring reasoning but did worse of decision making tasks. Both tasks use the CE therefore the slave system is more complicated than Baddeley and Hitch originally stated
4 cognitive interview techniques
-report everything
-reinstate context
-change perspective
-reverse the order
Explain reporting everything and why it helps cognitive interview
Recall and report everything the witness can remember without any interruption. This prevents any retroactive interference.
Explain reinstating the context and why it helps cognitive interview
Remember the environment. Prevents state/contact dependent forgetting
Explain change perspective and why it helps cognitive interview
Recall incident from another perspective. Disrupts the effect of schemas
Explain reverse the order and why it helps cognitive interview
Go from ending to beginning. Avoids proactive and retroactive interference and reduces the effect of schemas
Harlow procedure
Harlow aimed to find if baby rhesus monkeys would prefer a source of food or a source of comfort + protection as an attachment figure. Lab experiments saw the babies raised in isolation. They had 2 surrogate mothers. One was made of wire mesh and contained a feeding bottle while the other was made of cloth but didn’t contain a feeding bottle. Harlow undertook a series of different scenarios and observed what the rhesus monkeys instinct was.
what is Interactional synchrony
Interactional synchrony is where an infant mirrors the actions of another person,
Lorenz study of imprinting procedures
Lorenz conducted an experiment in which goslings were hatched either with their mother or in an incubator. Once goslings had hatched they proceeded to follow the first moving object that they saw between 13 & 16 hours after hatching; in this case, Lorenz.
Lorenz study of imprinting findings
Lorenz found that geese follow the first moving object they see. This process is known as imprinting, and suggests that attachment is innate and programmed genetically. Lorenz believed that once imprinting has occurred, it cannot be reversed, nor can a gosling imprint on anything else.
