Terms in this set (131)
Goals of Scientific Method
Observe & describe
Understand & predict
Apply & control
Is a systematic way of organising & explaining observations
Leads to new predictions that can be tested
A good theory:
Fits the known facts- the observations that we already know and have- explain the known facts
Makes new testable predictions
Is falsifiable- theory must be able to be proven wrong
5 Steps in the Scientific Method
Formulate a testable hypothesis
Design a study- choose a research design
Conduct the study & collect data
Analyse & evaluate the data
Report the findings
Step 1: Formulate a testable hypothesis
Translate theory into a testable hypothesis: a prediction based on the relationship between 2 or more variables- specific and testable, operationalise variables - IV and DV
Turning abstract concepts into concrete variables that we can measure or manipulate
Reliability and Validity
Reliability (internal validity)
Does the measure produce consistent results?
Validity (external validity)
Does it measure what it's supposed to measure?
Step 2: Research Design: Observation
Observation: naturalistic- researcher carefully observes behavior without intervening
Advantages- Behaviour in natural setting, not contrived, Can provide new insights
Disadvantages- Reactivity: difficult to remain unobtrusive, Hard to identify cause-effect relations
Case Study: in-depth investigation of individual person/situation- interview, direct observation, records, psychological tests- looking for consistency in case studies
Advantages: Can provide rich, compelling data to support a theory
Disadvantages: Representative of general population? Subjectivity: investigators may see what they expect to see
Surveys: use questionnaires or interviews to gather information about specific aspects of behaviour
Advantages: data on difficult-to-observe behaviour, data from a large sample
Disadvantages: self-report data can be unreliable, intentional deception, social desirability, response sets, reliance on memory
Correlational research: looking for relationships among variables, -1 to 1
Advantages- Useful for studying variables that the researcher can't manipulate
Disadvantages- Can demonstrate that a relationship exists, but can't demonstrate causality
BUT CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION
Experimental Research: establish causation to a researcher
- manipulate one variable to see its effect on another variable
Advantages- high levels of control, cause and effect
Disadvantages- artificial scenarios, cant explore some research questions
Basic elements of an experiment
Manipulation of independent variable
Holding all other variables constant
Measurement of dependent variable
Eliminating sources of bias / alternative explanations for results
People have an equal chance of being in either the experimental or control conditions
Individual differences spread across condition
Changes on the dependent variable are not caused by differences between people in the groups
Variables are confounded when they are linked together in a way that makes it difficult to sort out their specific effects
This is why we use random assignment
Sources of bias
Participants respond in the way they think the experimenter wants them to respond
Participants' condition improves because they believe the procedures will help them
The tendency of experimenters to let their expectancies alter the way they treat their participants
Either experimenter or participant unaware of purpose of the study
Both experimenter and participant "blind" to the purpose of the study
Definition of Attitudes
An attitude is an association between an act or object and an evaluation (Fazio, 1986)
Can be thought of as having three components (Himmelfarb & Eagly, 1974)
Attitudes differ from...
Values- Broad abstract goals that lack a specific reference point (e.g., achievement, salvation etc)
Opinions- Verbal manifestations of an attitude, the expression of an evaluative position
Schemas- Attitudes suggest how people feel about objects; schemas are not necessarily affective
Factors in Attitude Change
Yale studies - focus on 4 factors
Hypothesise that more credible sources would have more effect on attitude change than non-credible sources
Credibility - Hovland & Weiss (1951)
Participants read article about practicality of building nuclear powered submarines
Message attributed to: Oppenheimer or Pravda
Hovland & Weiss (1951)
The sleeper effect
Discounting: initially giving message from non-credible source less credence
Disassociation: uncoupling of message content and source over time- over time we are persuaded by the message because over time we forget of the low credibility of the source
If we can understand the message, who said it doesn't really matter - over time we get convinced
Communicator factors: Attractiveness
Ethos that attractive likeable people are more persuasive (e.g., Chaiken & Eagly, 1983)
Debono & Telesca (1990)
Slide of woman attractive or made to look unattractive
Strong and weak message
Results: attractive woman seen as more persuasive, but only for the strong message
Fear is a common tool used in advertising
Early studies showed fear can have the opposite effect
Is fear an effective way to change people's attitudes?
Janis & Feshbach (1953)
Varied the extent of fear causing information about dental decay
Found that participants given high fear message were less likely to follow the recommendations in the message
BUT DEPENDS ON EFFICACY
Central and Peripheral Route- process of attitude change
Central- issue is important to us, time to think about the issue, cognitive capacity to think about the issue
Peripheral- issue not important, limited time to think about the message, distracted, in a good mood
Cognitive dissonance theory
Inconsistency between cognitions results in an aversive psychological state called dissonance
Seek to reduce this by:
Changing one of the cognitions
Reducing the importance one of the cognitions
Adding additional consonant cognitions
Induced Compliance- Festinger and Carlsmith
2 simple motor tasks performed for 1 hour
Told the "real" purpose was to look at the effects of psychological "set" on performance
Offered $1 or $20 to tell the next person (confederate) that the task was enjoyable
Then rated how much they enjoyed the task
Induced compliance- the grasshopper study, Zimbardo et al.
Attitude towards a number of different foodstuffs
Eat fried grasshoppers?
Friendly or unfriendly experimenter
Hypocrisy (and water use)
Positive self-concept inconsistent with feelings of hypocrisy
Dickerson, Thibodeau, Aronson, & Miller (1992)
Water conservation - showering
Manipulated mindfulness of past behaviour
A public commitment urging others to take shorter showersversus no commitment
Measured length of shower and whether they turned the tap off during the shower
The process by which people combine information about others to make overall judgments
Two ways in which impressions might be formed
Algebraically and configurationally
Algebraic models (Anderson, 1978)
Impressions formed on the basis of a mechanical combination of information about a person
Three algebraic models
Based on Gestalt principles: the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
People combine information they receive about someone into an overall impression that is quite different from the simple sum of reactions to individual items of information about that person
Central and peripheral traits
Participants exposed to the list containing warm generated a much more favourable impression of the target.
Impression not formed algebraically. An emergent pattern is formed that may vary depending on the total context of the information provided
Schemas are cognitive structures that represent knowledge about a concept or type of stimulus (Fiske & Taylor, 1991)- important for how they represent social stigma
Formed on basis of past experience
Schemas are like theories
Types of schemas
Event schemas / scripts
Role schemas (sometimes thought of as a script)
Stereotypes - classifying people according to social categories
Implicit personality theories - principles about what sorts of characteristics go together to form certain types of personality
Shortcut cognitive processes that yield quick estimates or answers (Kahneman & Tversky)
People judge an event's frequency by the ease with which they can bring it to mind
People judge likelihood of group membership by comparing features of particular case to the prototype- tend to put things in categories when they sound like they fit them- we tend to ignore important base characteristics
Heider and Attribution
the processes by which people infer the causes of their own and others' behaviour
We don't just passively observe behaviour
Social perception motivated by need to predict and control the environment
Attribute behaviour to either:
Situational factors: stimuli in the environment
Dispositional factors: individual personality characteristics
Kelly's covariation model
The covariation principle - we attribute a behaviour to the cause with which it covaries over time
If varies across people - this person performs the behavior but not others
LOW CONSENSUS- someone is sarcastic towards someone and someone is not sarcastic- so we take this behavior and assume/ designate the attribute to the sarcastic person
If varies across targets - towards this target, but not others
LOW CONSISTENCY - not all the time; the sarcasm is in one context and not another- so we think the sarcasm is due to the environment rather than the person because in a different context the behavior varies
Fundamental Attribution Error
Tendency to attribute another person's behaviour to his or her own dispositional qualities, rather than to the situation
More prominent in individualistic cultures- western cultures
Jones & Harris (1967)
Participants rated the true attitudes of student speech-writers toward Castro
told speeches freely written (choice)
told speeches assigned (no-choice)
Tendency to attribute our own behaviour to external factors and others' behaviours to dispositional causes
Nisbett et al. (1973)
Participants rated themselves, friend, father & TV newsreader on a number of traits
Person possessed the trait
Person possessed opposite trait
Didn't have either trait; depends on situation- DISPOSITIONAL ATTRIBUTION
Motivation and Attribution Error
Tendency to attribute successes to stable, internal factors and failures to temporary, external factors
Self-presentation (make us look better to other people)
Enhance self-esteem (make us feel better about ourselves)
False consensus effect
Tendency to see one's own behaviour as typical- selective exposure
An important mechanism by which people maintain their own beliefs/opinions
Selective exposure; maintains our self-esteem
Compliance: agreeing to a request from someone who does not have the authority to make you obey.
A person first makes a small request, then makes a larger, related request
Freedman and Fraser (1966) asked 36 people if they would answer a short survey on household products. Later, they called the same people back and asked if they would allow a team of men from the research project to go through their house for 2 hours classifying household products- 53% agreed
At the same time, the experimenters contacted 36 new people who had not been contacted previously, and asked them if they would agree to the large favour.
Only 22% agreed
Power of commitment
The foot in the door technique helps demonstrate the power of commitment.
Once a choice has been made people feel pressure (both from within themselves and from others) to act consistently with that commitment ... even if this becomes increasingly costly.
Once we make a commitment we tend to add new reasons to justify the decision. Even if the original reason for the decision is taken away, the newly discovered reasons are often enough to support the commitment ("growing legs to stand on")
This can be exploited by others ..
A person makes what seems to be a reasonable request, and then reveals a hidden cost afterwards.
Cialdini et al. (1978) asked participants if they would commit to an experiment. Everybody agreed. The experimenters then informed the group that the experiment was scheduled to start at 7am- 56% agreed
A separate group of participants were asked simply if they were prepared to do an experiment that began at 7am- 31% agreed
Optimal conditions for compliance
Commitment can be increased by
Getting people to commit something in writing
Getting people to make public commitments
Making the individual feel that the commitment was freely chosen rather than one that was induced by outside pressure
Power of reciprocation
One of the most powerful norms (or social rules) in society is that if somebody does something nice for you then you should do something nice back.
Regan (1971) conducted a study in which a confederate either did a small act of kindness toward a participant (buying a Coke) ... or they didn't. After the session, the confederate asked the participant if he/she was interested in buying some raffle tickets off him "as a favour". Participants who had been given the Coke bought twice as many tickets than did the other participants
Another form of reciprocation is where somebody makes a concession to us ... under these circumstances we often feel obliged to make a concession ourselves.
This strategy has been used to some effect in international relations and is one way in which wars and high level conflicts could be defused.
Of course it can also be exploited by salespeople
Door in the face
A person makes a ridiculously large request, and then follows it up with a smaller, more reasonable request.
Cialdini et al. (1975) asked college students if they would spend 200 hours counselling juvenile delinquents ... everybody refused. He then asked if they would be willing to chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents to the zoo- 50% agreed
A second group of students was asked if they would agree to the small favour, without first asking for the large favour- 17% agreed
The door in the face technique is partly a demonstration of reciprocal concessions, and partly a testament to the power of contrast effects.
Humans are better at making relative judgments than absolute judgments - when preceded by a very large request, subsequent requests seem more reasonable.
Can be taken advantage of by governments, salespeople etc
Obedience: An authority specifically commands us to change our behaviour, and we do.
Milgram (1963) asked participants to give electric shocks to somebody else as part of a learning experiment. Each time the "learner" (a confederate) got an answer wrong, the "teacher" was required to give a more intense shock
Key factors to obedience
History status of authority figure
Absence of clear cut point for disobeying
Belief that the authority figure will take future responsibility for actions
Barriers to empathy for victims
The role of empathy in obedience
Obedience is reduced the greater the potential for empathy. Compared to the original study, full obedience decreased ...
when the learner could be heard crying out (60% obedience)
when the learner was in the room (40% obedience)
when the teacher had to place the learner's hand on the electrode (30% obedience ...!!)
Why are people so aggressive? Biological explanations?
We know that the amygdala is particularly important in regulating aggression
Alcohol reduces the ability of people to monitor the consequences of their actions, increasing the likelihood of aggression
Do our genes matter?
There is a genetic link to aggression.
A 'violent temper' is heritable
'Giving people a hard time' is heritable
Assault (verbal, indirect, direct) is heritable
Antisocial behaviour is heritable
Genetic basis for criminality
Propensity for adolescent misconduct heritable
But no person is inevitably aggressive ... social psychologists are more interested in how social factors and patterns of thinking might lead to aggression
Observational Learning explanations
Sometimes people (particularly children) learn how to behave by watching others. People can behave aggressively because they see others behaving aggressively.
This issue is particularly important in relation to television viewing. Research suggests that there is a strong correlation between the amount of violent TV children watch and their aggression levels
But the link is complex ... aggressive kids watch more violent TV and this, in turn, makes them more aggressive
Aggressive television effects
Josephson (1987) found that children played more aggressively after watching a violent TV program than when they watched a non-violent TV program. The effect was enhanced when the children were given a cue that reminded them of the violent TV
Modeling and aggression
Some evidence of "copy-cat" effect when people witness or hear about acts of violence.
"Werther effect" ... a high profile suicide spawns a sharp increase in the rate of suicide, as well as an increase in "accidental" deaths
Social cognitive explanations
According to social cognitive explanations, people develop aggressive tendencies because of maladaptive thinking patterns.
Certain people have dysfunctional and aggressive belief structures about the world. For some people, neutral or even positive comments can be perceived as hostile, because they see the world through a lens of mistrust.
The challenge is to get people to identify and change their dysfunctional belief systems
Crowd behaviour and deindividualization
Accounts of crowd behaviour traditionally have emphasised the notion of de-individuation. The argument goes like this ...
· people are essentially aggressive and impulsive
· people inhibit aggression to conform to "civilized" societal norms
· in crowds, we have anonymity, and so we have less fear of negative evaluation
· we revert to our aggressive and impulsive instincts
When wearing lab coats, participants made more negative comments about their parents and used more obscene language than did people in a control condition.
When wearing cloaks and hoods, participants gave more electric shocks to strangers.
Crowds are more likely to bait a potential suicide victim ("Jump!") if it is night and/or the crowd is large
Anonymity and deindividualization
Anonymity and deindividuation assist people to take on whatever role is implied by the situation (can be both antisocial and prosocial)
Zimbardo's prison study
Zimbardo (1971) built a fake jail and arbitrarily split college students into "prisoners" and "guards". Both prisoners and guards were deindividuated to socialize them into their roles.
Those socialized into the role of "guards" became cruel and abusive, where as those socialized into the role of prisoners became compliant and powerless.
Zimbardo had planned to observe the interactions for two weeks, but the behaviour of the guards was so abusive he had to stop the experiment after 6 days.
The power of the situation: Psychologically stable, normal members of the population had descended into abusive, degraded behaviour because the role allowed it
Kip Williams and colleagues made people feel excluded from groups using a ball-throwing paradigm.
After being ostracized, people reported
· lower mood
· lower self-esteem
· reduced sense of control over their lives
· lower sense of belonging
· reduced sense that life is meaningful
· heightened awareness of death
These even occur when ostracisers cannot be seen
Ostracised individuals then later displayed more agression
A voluntary helpfulness that is motivated by concern about the welfare of other people, rather than by the possibility of personal reward
We are often motivated to behave kindly for self-centred reasons:
(a) we want to avoid the personal pain of seeing someone suffer, or the guilt of not helping people in distress,
(b) we want to share vicariously the joy that someone else feels when his or her life improves.
But, if people feel empathy for someone else, they often demonstrate altruism even when these selfish options are denied them
Factors effecting altruism
You're more likely to be altruistic when you've seen another person be altruistic (modelling)
· The greatest predictor of whether somebody will be altruistic is the extent to which they feel compassion. Families who teach their children to think how their actions will affect others are more likely to be altruistic later in life.
· Altruism is more likely when people are not in a rush
· Altruism is more common in rural areas and small towns than in large cities
· Men are slightly more likely than women to show altruism toward strangers; women are slightly more likely than men to show altruism toward friends and family
Two views of infancy
Nature=knowledge/skills/personality are all present (in some form) at birth
Nurture = infant's mind is a blank slate; everything must be learned from scratch
What are infants like?
20 cm fixed focus at birth
Enables clear view of caregiver's face
20/500 visual acuity at birth, rapidly improves
Adult vision by 8 months of age, coincides with onset of crawing
Listening preferences at birth
This preference can't be inborn!
Nurture begins in utero
Preference for sweet tastes at birth
Disgust reaction to bitter, sour
Skin-to-skin contact important in early development
Calms crying, assists sleep cycles, promotes growth in premature infants
at one month, babies recognize Mum's smell; they are able to discriminate between two women's smell
New born reflexes
Human infants are born with a set of around 20 reflexes
Reflex = involuntary fixed action pattern, elicited by a specific stimulus
Some are lifelong: blinking, swallowing, etc.
Some seen only in newborns: Moro (aka startle), grasping, rooting, sucking, stepping, many others
Newborn reflexes "disappear" between 2 and 6 months after birth
Temperament = pattern of physiological, emotional, cognitive responses that are characteristic of an individual
Numerous classification schemes; reducing to:
Easy, difficult, slow to warm up
Experiments with babies
Experimental techniques rely on infants' innate abilities
Habituation - reduction of response to a new stimulus over time (e.g., boredom)
Surprise - longer looking at unexpected than expected events
Preferential sucking technique
Babies suck a dummy to make a tape play
babies prefer their maternal language
Preferential looking technique
Babies look at one or another visual display
Babies prefer to look at human faces
Babies look at one type of display until bored, then second type of display is presented
Babies distinguish male from female faces
Violation of expectation paradigm
Researchers create "magic show" that has a surprising outcome
Measure infants' surprise and looking
Babies expect objects to obey the laws of gravity
Nature versus Nurture?
brain doubles in size in first two years of life
impact of genes depends on environment in which person develops
Nature via nurture
genetic predispositions drive us to select and create particular environments
First attachment starts in infancy
Attachment = lifelong affectionate bond to another individual
Another way to say "love"
Babies love their mothers
a baby loves his mother because she satisfies his needs
Infant motivation = food, clean nappy, etc.
person providing these things becomes associated with drive reduction/pleasure/comfort
criticism: "cupboard love"
Practical application - orphanage system
Poor physical, psychological, intellectual outcomes in this system
Alternatives to Dependency theory: Ethology research
Konrad Lorenz's studies of imprinting in geese
infant/parent bond not based on food
Harlow & Harlow's research
Infant Rhesus monkeys raised in isolation
Some provided with feeding surrogate Mum and/or soft surrogate Mum
Extreme isolation- no contact but food, clean nappy; surrogate mothers, surrogate mothers with bottle; biological needs associating pleasure with attachment- Freud
Outcomes of monkey study
Isolates with soft Mum clung
Isolates with feeding and soft Mums clung to soft
Isolates without soft Mum showed bizarre behaviour
INFANT MONKEY PREFERS CLINGING TO SOFT, NOT FEEDING SURROGATE MUM
Effects of isolation on monkeys
Isolates re-introduced to groups were disturbed
Males unable to mate
Mated females incompetent mothers
John Bowlby: psychoanalyist
-interested in ethology
and child maladjustment
A baby loves its mother because she provides security
Infant motivation = feeling of safety
Control system model
Set goal = proximity to caregiver
Behaviour turned on until set goal is reached
Felt security, separation and reunion
Attachment behavioural system: on par with feeding and mating, onset times with locomotion
Secure base model
Mary Ainsworth: student of Bowlby
If no danger, then explore
If threat, then seek proximity
A = anxious avoidant
B = secure
C = anxious ambivalent
Secure B Attachment
About 55% of infants are secure in Western cultures
Baby uses Mum as secure base
Explores room after warm up period
Prefers Mum to stranger
Distressed at separation
Seeks contact at reunion
Anxious avoidant A attachment
About 30% of infants are anxious avoidant in western cultures
Infant tends to ignore Mum
Less avoidant of stranger than other groups
No distress at separation
No proximity seeking at reunion
Anxious ambivalent C attachment
About 15% of infants are anxious ambivalent in western cultures
Infant often "can't cope" in strange situation
Little exploration; tend to cling to Mum
Prone to hysteria at separation
Aggressive on reunion
Ainsworths home observations
B mothers more likely to be "sensitive"
Spending time in face-to-face contact
Feeding on baby-centred schedule
Quick response to crying
A mothers more likely to report disliking contact with their infants
C mothers more likely to be inconsistent in their responses to their infants
Attachment classifications in context
Influenced by culture
High proportion of babies classified "A" in Western Europe
High proportion of babies classified "C" in Japan
Two-way street: babies' characteristics are likely to be as important as parents'
Critical period hypothesis
Bowlby: non-attachment in early years causes lifelong psychological malfunction
There is a "critical period" for attachment
Limited time in development when a particular stimulus has a profound effect on the organism. The same stimulus has little effect before or after the critical period.
Challenges to critical period hypothesis
Harlow's monkey therapy
Female isolates better at mothering second time around
Isolates housed with juveniles recovered
Outcomes for orphaned, abandoned human babies
Recent studies with Chinese, Romanian orphans show that effects of early deprivation can be overcome
Non verbal communication
Nonverbal communication is defined as: "the transfer of information by means other than words" (e.g., gaze, facial expression, posture, touch).
Roughly 60-65% of information and meaning is communicated non-verbally.
The role of nonverbal cues becomes greater when people are making judgements of a person's leadership ability
Reliance on nonverbal channels is greater when the verbal and nonverbal channels conflict
Children place greater reliance on verbal cues than adults do
Words are more important for communicating facts, whereas nonverbals are more important for judging emotions, attitudes, and interpersonal information
Emblems: Gestures that replace or stand in for spoken language
Emblems can be used to:
· Insult others ("you're an idiot")
· Give directions (e.g., "come here")
· Greeting others ("hi")
· Signalling departure ("bye")
· Replying to questions ("yes" or "no")
· Other emblems communicate more subtle and complex information.
Illustrators: Nonverbals that help complement or clarify the meaning of the words.
Hand gestures alone can help amplify, clarify or reinforce the spoken message.
Facial expressions and emotion
Emotion is often communicated through facial expression - these expressions are deeply ingrained and sometimes difficult to inhibit.
There are six basic emotions - happiness, surprise, sadness, fear, disgust, and anger - from which more complex or blended emotions are derived
Theories of emotional expressions
(1) Universalists (e.g., Darwin)
Universalists argue that emotional expressions are innate, and that these expressions developed through evolution because they were biologically adaptive
* emotional expressions are very consistent across Western, Eastern, and pre-literate cultures (e.g., PNG tribespeople).
* New-born babies display distress, disgust, and interest much like adults. Before 6 months, they express happiness, surprise & fear.
* Blind and deaf children encode emotional expressions similarly to other children.
* Some emotional expressions resemble those of other species (e.g. anger).
(2) Neurocultural theory (e.g., Ekman)
Assumes that emotional expressions are innately "pre-wired" into the brain, but through experience people learn culture-specific rules for their display ("display rules").
Japanese, for example, have culturally ingrained display rules prohibiting the public display of anger and disgust
Cross cultural differences
When cultures have different rules about what nonverbal behaviour means, there is the potential for misunderstanding and offence.
Some emblems have very different meanings in different cultures (e.g., President Nixon debacle).
Eye contact differences
In many Anglo cultures, people are socialized to gaze in the direction of the speaker's face ... this shows interest. In contrast, African, African-American, and Aboriginal Australian listeners are taught to avoid eye contact, especially with a person of a higher status. This can cause misunderstandings, particularly in legal and educational contexts.
· Arab men tend to engage in a relatively high amount of eye contact.
Arab men have a more direct body orientation than do Americans, who have a more direct body orientation than Indonesians
For Arab men, loudness indicates strength and sincerity while softness indicates weakness and deviousness. Britons and Europeans use softer speech than Americans.
· In America, Whites and Blacks have different rules for indicating that they're interested. Whites tend to nod, make eye contact, and vocalise ("uh-huh"). Blacks typically only do one of these ... they're less likely to vocalise their encouragement
Deception is a prevalent (and adaptive) element of communication. It can be used for a number of reasons, ranging from altruistic to exploitative.
How can we tell whether somebody is lying?
There are a number of stereotypes that we have about what indicates lying, only some of which are backed up by research.
Accuracy in detecting deception
The adherence to stereotypical (but incorrect) assumptions about how liars behave inhibits people's success rates.
But ... the vocal channel is more revealing than the visual channel. When people are exposed only to a speaker's voice, they're more accurate at detecting deception than when they're looking at the speaker's face.
This might be because the voice is less easily controlled than the face.
Ekman, however, claims that there are visual cues that are difficult for people to control, and can be used to detect liars (micro-expressions).
Schools of Therapy
- Cause of emotional distress is biological and therefore can be remedied in medication
Psychodynamic- SIGMUND FREUD
- The source of distress is in the past therefore we need insight, catharsis and corrective emotional experiences; what happens to our unconscious (what's under the water, not easily accessible by us)
- Uses analysis of behaviour and effects change via conditioning- classical or operant; the way behaviour affects what happens to us, how are these consequences reinforcing to us to keep the behaviour going
- Includes the notion that the way we think also affects the way we behave and feel
Analysis of problem behaviour- stimulus, organism, response, consequence, contingency
- Teach parent to manage non-compliant behaviour
- Identify the behaviour that you want to occur- walking in the supermarket, helping with the shopping
- Tell the child what you want him to do; practice and reward efforts
- Praise the behaviour you want to occur
- Remove attention form the behaviour you do not want and manage it assertively
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
- Main focus is that thoughts, feelings and behaviour combine to influence a person's quality of life
- CBT is a combination of behaviour therapy and cognitive therapy
- The behaviour therapy uses strategies to change behaviour that may have been unhelpful to the person
- The cognitive therapy focuses on the way the person thinks about a situation eg. Negative thinking
Strategies of Cognitive Behavior Therapy
- explain the rationale of thoughts influencing feelings
- identify negative and unhelpful thoughts
- challenge negative thoughts
- replace negative thoughts with more realistic thoughts- cognitive restructuring
- behavioral activation
- behavioral experiments
A- Activating event eg. Partner 1 ½ hours late
B- Beliefs or thoughts about the situation "they are stuck in traffic"/ "they don't want to see me" / "they've crashed"
C- Consequences- emotional or behaviour - bit anxious, annoyed; reschedule/ sad, cancel plans/ worried, trying to contact them
How do we know if therapy works?
- For an intervention to be 'evidence based'
- 2 independent RCT's
- Treatment is better than placebo or alternative treatment
- RCT must be competently carried out
Randomized Controlled Trial
- Gold standard
- Specified recruitment, inclusion and exclusion criteria- clinical trials register
- Random assignment to condition
- Conditions clearly specified (manuals, checking)
- Systematic assessment of outcomes at pre-post and follow-up
- Adequate power to detect differences- big enough sample size to detect any effects
What do the result suggest?
- Describe the study, outcomes in terms of the hypotheses, differences between groups, conclusions, limitations
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for anxiety in children
* CB intervention: 6 sessions for parents; 6 sessions for children
* N = 55 children (7-14 years) & their parents
* Trial evaluated clinic-based condition; therapist-assisted bibliotherapy condition; and wait-list control
* Wanted to examine the efficacy of different delivery modalities
Conclusions and Limitations
- In light of the fact that more than 80% of anxiety-disordered children never receive treatment, these data suggest that therapist-supported bibliotherapy represents a cost-effective means of reaching a greater number of anxious children
- Limitations: sample size, requires replication
- Searches for all the studies completed using a particular intervention- not only published studies
- Evaluates them on specific criteria- methodology, outcomes (eg. Effect size, attrition, maintenance of change)
- Draws conclusions about the evidence base for intervention
Prejudice has three components:
- beliefs about the attitude object (often held as stereotypes).
- strong feelings (usually negative) about the group
- intentions to behave in negative ways toward the group and its members
Why do such stereotypes survive?
kernel of truth?
· people's behaviour is interpreted through the lens of the stereotype
· people who violate the stereotype are sub-typed
· disconfirming evidence is explained away, or attributed to luck
· stereotypes are often perpetuated through media
· men are motivated to believe the stereotypes in order to justify power ("legitimizing myths")
Hostile v Benevolent sexism
· "Women exaggerate problems they have at work"
· "Once a woman gets a man to commit to her, she usually tries to put him on a tight leash"
· "When women lose to men in a fair competition, they typically complain about being discriminated against"
· "In a disaster, women ought to be rescued before men."
· "Men should be willing to sacrifice their own well being in order to provide financially for the women in their lives"
· "Women should be cherished and protected by men"
Old-fashioned, hostile sexism is directed mostly toward women who stray from traditional paths - the career women, feminists, athletes, lesbians etc.
For traditional women, there is a cluster of apparently benevolent attitudes that put women on a pedestal, but reinforce their subordination (benevolent sexism).
At the turn of the century, many explicitly racist attitudes were not considered racist but rather scientific orthodoxy.
It was assumed that races differed in terms of intelligence, sophistication and morality - these assumptions later led to the ideology of eugenics. Hitler, for example, argued that the world could be improved by ridding the world of genetically weak or impure races.
Today, it is rare to see people argue that some races are superior to others ("old-fashioned racism"). Also, negative attitudes and stereotypes about Black people etc... have improved markedly
LaPiere (1934) spent two years travelling around the US with a young Chinese American couple. They visited 250 hotels, caravan parks, tourist homes and restaurants, and were refused service in only one.
After coming home, LaPiere contacted 128 of these places with the question: "Will you accept members of the Chinese race as guests in your establishment?"
92% said no, 7% were uncertain, and only 1% said yes!
Gaertner & Dovidio (1986) argue that most people are motivated to maintain a non-prejudiced self-image; they find racial prejudice aversive, endorse fair treatment of all groups, and fear appearing prejudiced.
BUT ... many of these people subconsciously harbour negative feelings toward minorities all the same.
Discrimination leaks out in situations where behaviour can be justified as non-prejudiced.
Evidence for aversive racism
A host of studies show that when people are described in neutral or positive ways, people tend to show no racism, and sometimes even favour minority group members.
But when people are described in negative ways, people are more hostile to members of minority groups than to members of the ingroup.
In the latter case people can legitimize their hostility toward minorities by focusing on the person's unpleasant traits.
Stereotyping and Race
Duncan (1976) had White students observe on TV what they thought was a live conversation between a Black man and a White man.
The conversation degenerated into an argument in which one person lightly shoved the other.
Participants then had to provide their interpretation of the events.
Cortell et al.
Correll et al. (2002) constructed a computer game in which people had to decide whether to shoot or not shoot people.
The targets were either armed or not armed, and were either Black or White.
The Police Officers Dilemma- the shooters bias occurs for black and white people
Fear of reporting discrimination
Black people and women who attribute a failure to discrimination are rated as less likable than those who "take it on the chin"
· People seem to understand the negative consequences of claiming discrimination - for example women are more likely to cry "discrimination" when on their own or with other women than when they're with men
Women over estimate their response to sexism
BUT ... when women are asked what they would do if they came across an example of sexism, they massively overestimate their willingness to confront the sexism head-on ...
Swim & Hyers (1999) asked people how they thought they'd respond when faced with a certain sexist event. In a second study, they measured how people actually did respond... large percent said they would respond to discrimination, but actually wouldn't in real life when in the situation.
When stigmatized groups are conscious that other people might treat them stereotypically, they feel anxiety about their performance. This can impede performance.
Steele and Aronson (1995) had Black and White students anticipate taking a "very difficult" test that was defined as being "diagnostic of intellectual ability" or "just a laboratory exercise".
They then had to complete ambiguous word fragments such as "______ CE" or "____ERIOR".
When Black students were anticipating a test of "intellectual ability" (as compared to "a lab exercise"), they
(a) were more likely to reveal race-related anxieties on the word completion task (e.g., "RACE" "INFERIOR")
(b) did worse on the task!
Self Fulfilling Prophecies
Sometimes your expectations of a person change the way you interact with them, which then changes their behaviour in line with your negative expectations.
Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) administered an IQ test to school children and told their teachers that a particular group of 20 students had been identified as "bloomers" ... people who were particularly likely to show development in the future. In fact, the 20 students were chosen randomly.
Those labelled as bloomers performed significantly better than non bloomers.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
MCAT Behavioral Sciences | Kaplan Guide
Social Psych Final
Psych 104 Final
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
PSYC2020 QUIZ 2
PSYC2040 SOCIAL AND ORGANISATIONAL
PSYC2020 QUIZ 1