Individual Differences Approach| Section C

Individual Differences Section C

The Assumptions

The main assumption of the individual differences approach is that to understand the complexity of human behaviour and experiences, to do this it is necessary to study the differences between people rather than those things that we have in common. For example we may identify different personality traits by using IQ tests which allows us to see the similar characteristics, however despite this we all have a set of unique life experiences which shape us into the people that we are.

Explinations for everyday problems using the Individual Differences Approach 

How does the individual differences approach explain abnormality?

The individual differences approach would suggest that that abnormality could be due to our life experiences that shape us into the people we are, for example being classified as being insane or mentally ill would attach a label of abnormality to a person alienating them from the rest of the society. Rosenhan suggested that a person would be classed as abnormal due to the labels attached to having a mental illness. For example in his study even though all of the researches acted normal upon admittance to the psychiatric hospitals they were still deemed as insane and had to remain institutionalised between 11 to 52 days.

How does the individual differences approach explain an addiction to gambling?

The individual differences approach would suggest that addiction to gambling is caused due to the differences between individuals rather than the commonalities between individuals. For example people who gamble are only a small minority of the rest of the society which make us different. Griffiths would suggest that gambling addition is due to the personalisation of the machine that the gamblers use. For example if the gamblers were to lose they were more likely to blame the situation on not concentrating or if they were to lose they would feel like the machine is rewarding them for the hard work which is what makes gambling addictive.

How does the individual differences approach explain multiple personality disorder?

The individual differences approach states that it is our life experiences that shapes us who we are therefor multiple personality disorder is a product of our life experiences, such as being punished for something as a child. Thigpen and Cleckley suggested that multiple personality disorder patients have created different personalities as a coping mechanism when being punished. For example eve white from their case study would be the personality that got punished when Eve Black did something naughty such as going into the forbidden woods as a way of avoiding being punished.

 Similarities and differences between the studies in the individual differences approach

Similarities and differences between Thigpen and Cleckley’s case of multiple personality disorder and Rosenhan’s sane in insane places:

One similarity would be that both Rosenhan and Thigpen and Cleckley have ethical issues. Rosenhan’s patients had to follow the hospitals procedures such as taking medicine whilst they were institutionalised which could have made them believe that they were insane and could have potentially put them in harmful situations. Thigpen and cleckley used hypnosis as one of taw ways of interviewing a personality which could have potentially brought back experiences and memories that Eve did not want to remember which puts the participants in harm. Another similarity is that both Thigpen and Cleckley dealt with psychiatric problems. Thigpen and cleckley studied the issue of multiple personality disorder, where as Rosenhan studied the labelling of people suffering with schizophrenia in psychiatric hospitals.

A difference between Thigpen and Cleckley and Rosenhan is the experimental method they used. Rosenhan did a participant observation where the researchers being the participant recorder how they were treated in psychiatric hospitals when they were acting sane, whereas Thigpen and Cleckley did an in-depth case study on one individual.

Similarities and differences between Rosenhan on being sane in insane places and Griffiths on gambling behaviour on fruit machines

One similarity between Rosenhan and Griffiths is that both studies were high in ecological validity. Rosenhan’s study was high in ecological validity as pseudo patients were observing behaviour in real psychiatric hospitals in California and were looking at an issue that is relevant in how institutions were run. Griffiths studied the behaviour of real gamblers in a real everyday arcade setting. Another similarity is both studies collected quantitative and qualitative data. Rosenhan collected quantitative data by how many psychiatrists and nurses thought that real patients were pseudo patients admitted to their hospitals and quantitative data that was collected by researchers of the behaviours and comments made by nurses and staff in their hospitals where as Griffiths collected quantitative data from total plays, total time , play rate, end stake wins the win rate in time and win rate in plays by each individual in normal condition and the qualitative comments made by the participants in the thinking aloud condition.

A differences between Rosenhan and Griffiths is that Rosenhan dealt with something that is already classed as a psychiatric problem such as the labels given to a person that was insane but is back to being sane in the case of schizophrenia and Griffiths deals with addiction which is something that could potentially become a psychiatric problem in the future.

Similarities and differences between Griffiths on gambling behaviour on fruit machines and Thigpen and Cleckley on multiple personality disorder

One similarity between Griffiths and Thigpen and Cleckley is that both studies collected both quantitative and qualitative data. Griffiths collected quantitative data from total plays, total time , play rate, end stake wins the win rate in time and win rate in plays by each individual in normal condition and the qualitative comments made by the participants in the thinking aloud condition. And Thigpen and Cleckley collected quantitative data by carrying out IQ tests on each of the personalities studied and qualitative data by the comments made under hypnosis therapy. Another similarity is that both studies looked at natural phenomenon. Griffiths looked at gambling behaviour and Thigpen and Cleckley studied a person suffering with multiple personality disorder.

One difference between Griffiths and Thigpen and Cleckley is that both used a different experimental method. Thigpen and Cleckley used a case study method where one patient is studied in detail over a long period of time whereas Griffiths used a field experiment where he controlled variables in a natural setting which in this case was the arcade. Another difference between Thigpen and Cleckley and Griffiths is that Thigpen and Cleckley studied something that is a psychiatric problem which is multiple personality disorder whereas Griffiths studied something that has a potential to be a psychiatric problem which is gambling.

Strengths and weaknesses of the individual differences approach

One strength of the individual differences approach is that it can provide useful information in improving the experience of people with mental health problems. This is a strength because it can lead to a revision of the way that people are diagnosed and treated. For example in Griffiths study the information collected from the study could guide us in what causes gamblers to become addicted and how to stop this process from happening in the first place. Another strength is that the individual differences approach has been the development for using psychiatric tests to measure the differences between individuals in the qualities such as personality and intelligence. This is a strength because psychometric tests provide a reliable and quantitative data which can be easily analysed and therefore similarities and differences between individuals can be discovered. For example in Thigpen and Cleckley’s study  they showed us  how the different personalities of eve white  had different IQ levels which allowed us to see a significant differences between these personalities. One weakness of the individual differences approach is that it can rely too heavily on dispositional explanations at the expense of situational explanations. This is a problem because behaviour can therefore can therefore be attributed solely  to a person’s own characteristics or disposition to external factors such as the situation a person is in are ignored.  For example  in Thigpen and Cleckley’s study they claimed that the 3 faces of eve were significantly different however to an insignificant witness the video evidence 100 hours  often makes the differences of personalities easy to identify however they may not be that easy to identify in a different environment in real life. Another weakness with the individual differences approach is the ethical approach is the ethical issues raised with labelling people as being different. This is a weakness because labelling people as different or abnormal can have negative effect on individuals. For example in Rosenhan’s study those pseudo participants who stayed in the psychiatric hospitals for 52 days could have ended up believing their labels and believe that they actually suffered with the psychosis. 

♥Core Studies| Physiological Psychology| Dement and Kleitman (1957) Dream and Sleep♥

Dement and Kleitman (1957)| the Relation of Eye Movements during Sleep to Dream Activity

Dement and Kleitman studied how the stage of sleep you are in affects whether you can or can't recall your dreams.

Background to the study 

Sleeping consists of a number of stages-which can be shown by the different patterns in alpha and beta waves during a test called electroencephalography; which is a method of measuring different electrical activity in the brain by recording from electrodes which will be placed on the scalp. Electroencephalography can also be referred to as an (EEG).

Overall there are four stages of sleep:

Stage One is the lightest stage of sleep (by lightest I mean the easiest to wake a person up from), you can characterise it by a lowered heart rate, relaxed muscle tension and a lover body temperature. Really this is when the body begins a state of relaxation. This stage is represented by slow alpha waves that have a frequency between 8-12 Hz per second.

Stage Two is still light but deeper than stage one, a person can still be woken up relatively easily and this is represented by larger EEG waves and spindles (which are bursts of high frequency waves between 12-16 Hz)

Stage Three is a deeper sleep, the waves are now delta waves which are large and slow waves between 1-3 Hz, in this stage people don't respond to external stimuli such as a light switching on or a car alarm going off and are quite difficult to get up.

Stage Four is the deepest sleep, people in this stage of sleep will respond to personal stimuli such as their baby crying, their metabolic activity is also low. This stage is characterised by delta waves of 1 Hz.

It takes around 30 mins to get down to stage four sleeps. When at stage four you spend 30 mins in this stage and then we fluctuate between stages 3 and 2 but instead of re-entering stage 1 again we go into a phase called Active Sleep. This stage is represented by much desynchronised pattern similar to that if we were awake. In this stage our metabolic activity increases along with heart rate but the body is still more or less paralysed and this stage makes waking up a person an impossible task. This phase of sleep is referred to as the deepest stage called REM sleep (which stands Rapid Eye Movement) this is because you can observe the movement of your eyes in this stage under closed eyelids. We tend to spend 10-15 mins in REM sleep and then go back to stage 4, 3, 2 etc. This cycle takes about 70-90 mins to happen and is repeated 5-6 times a night.

A restoration theory suggests that non REM sleep restores bodily processes that have deteriorated during the day. Whereas REM sleep stimulates protein synthesis which replenishes brain processes. Sleep can be described as a survival function by keeping animals safe from predators, and hibernation can be seen as an extension of this process.

You might wonder why is it that we dream, well there are many theories that relate to just that question. Reorganisation of mental structures theory suggests that REM sleep is involved in the organisation of schemas which is the cognitive structures that support cognitive processes. This is supported by the finding that complex cognitive tasks lead to an increase in the time spent in REM sleep and also by the fact that babies spend so much time in REM sleep. IN other words it can be said that REM sleep is seen as a support of cognitive development. The Activation Synthesis Model proposes that dreams are the 'active interpretation of the signals produced by the cortex during REM sleep. Crick and Mitchinson (1983) suggested that this is a way of us being able to sort out all of the information that we absorbed that day so dreaming is something which allows our brain to decide what information we want to keep or get rid of. And finally Freud (1900) saw dreams as the 'royal road to the unconscious' and psychoanalytic therapists still use dream interpretation as a way  of interpreting individual patients hidden desires and thoughts.

Aim 

Aim of the study was to investigate the following three hypotheses:

Hyp 1- There will be a significant association between REM sleep and dreaming - which basically asks the question whether we dream in REM sleep.

Hyp 2- There will be a significant positive correlation between the estimate of the duration of dream and the length of eye movement- so this is asking whether our eye movement has anything with dreaming,

Hyp 3- There will be a significant association between the pattern of eye movement and the context of the dream- which is basically proposing that the direction in which we move our eyes associates the directions were looking in our dreams.

Participants 

The participants consisted of 9 people. The sample was studied in two groups, a group of five participants who were studied in depth and a group of four participants who were used as a control group (meaning that they were used for a comparison)

The sample was made up of 7 men and 2 women, although not confirmed it is suggested that there was one woman in each group.

Procedure

Sleep sessions took place in a 'sleep lab' that was set up for the experiment- which meant that participants were in a set up environment. Participants could eat normally but were told to not drink caffeine or alcohol on the day of the study- this took place so that any extraneous variables which could disturb the natural sleeping pattern of the participants. EEG electrodes were then placed near the eyes to measure the electric to measure electric activity and therefore REM (Rapid Eye Movement). From this D&K could know when a participant was in REM and what type of REM they were in. Electrodes were also placed around the skull so D&K could measure the brain activity of the participants.  The participants were then woken at various times in the night using a doorbell that was situated by their bed and were asked to record their dreams (if they remembered anything from them) on a voice recorder. Sometimes participants were woken during REM sleep and sometimes they weren't woken during REM sleep. If no dream were recalled it got recorded as a ''no dream''. Five out of nine participants were studied over a period of 61 nights with 351 awakenings in total and an average of 5.7 awakenings per night.

Testing Hyp 1:

Participants were woken up during the night with a loud doorbell sound, and then the participants had to speak into the voice recorder. They were then instructed to first state whether or not they had been dreaming and then, if they could remember the dream they would recall their dream. The participants were only reported as having dreamed if they could coherently recall their dream (give loads of detail about the dream). Participants were woken up on a schedule so one participant would be woken up three times in REM and then three times in N-REM so on, Two were woken up at random, One was told that he would only get woken up in REM but got woken up randomly. Another was woken up at the experimenter’s whim. To eliminate experimenter effects, the experimenter did not communicate with the participants during the night, and also to eliminate bias the participants were not told whether their eyes moved or not.

Testing Hyp 2:
The participants were also woken at either 5 or 15 mins into REM sleep and were asked to predict whether they had dreamt for 5 or 15 mins.

Testing Hyp 3:

The participants were woken up as soon as one of the four patterns of eye movement had lasted for at least one minute. On waking the participants were asked to describe in detail the content of their dream. The four patterns that prompted an awakening were: mainly vertical eye movements, mainly horizontal eye movements, both vertical and horizontal eye movements, very little or no eye movement.

Findings

All participants showed periods of REM every night during sleep. The REM EEG was characterised by a low volt. And relatively fast pattern which were characteristics of a deeper sleep. (Refer to your graph and background to the study to look at patterns of REM). REM never occurred at the beginning of the sleep cycle. REM periods which were not terminated by an awakening varied between 3 and 50 mins with a mean of about 20, and tended to increase in length as the night progressed. REM periods occurred at regular intervals during the night, though each participant has their own pattern: mean period of REM phase for the whole group was 92 mins, with individual norms varying to between 70-104 mins.

Hyp 1: in REM sleep 152 dreams were recalled in comparison to 39 dreams that weren't recalled. In N-REM sleep 11 dreams were recorded in comparison to the 149 dreams that weren't recorded. So this shows that that REM sleep is predominantly- but not exclusively- associated with dreaming. When participants were woken up at 11 mins into REM so the transition to N-REM they could remember distorted bits of information from their dreams.

Hyp 2: results to the estimates of the length of dreams were five mins into REM 45 participants correctly guessed the length of their dreams where as 6 didn't. When fifteen mins into REM 47 participants correctly guessed the length of their dream where as 13 didn't. Which suggests that all participants could correctly choose the correct dream duration fairly accurately? 

Hyp 3: There did appear to be some relationship between the dream content and the type of eye movements. After a series of vertical eye movements dreams such as: standing at the bottom of a cliff operating a hoist, and looking up at the climbers and down at the machinery, climbing up a series of ladders looking up and down, throwing basketballs at a net, first shooting and looking up at the net, and then looking down to pick another ball off the floor. Horizontal eye movements recorded such dreams such as watching two people throw tomatoes at each other. When a mixture of eye movements were recorded dreams involved looking at people or objects close to them. Little or no eye movements recorded dreams when a person was watching something from a distance or just staring fixedly at some object. In order to confirm the meaningfulness of the results of the relationship 20 naive and 5 of the experimental participants were asked to observe distant and close-up activity while awake. These measurements were in all cases comparable to those occurring during dreaming.

Evaluation 

The strength of this method is that it is high in reliability as such studies as this can be repeated by other researchers, And also it took place in a highly controlled environment which meant that any extraneous and confounding variables are ruled out. However it laced in ecological validity as none of the participants had a natural sleep because of being placed in unnatural settings and wouldn't sleep with electrodes placed on their head, but it could be looked over if the study might actually happen if the participants were in their own bed it might alter the sleeping pattern, 

The sample was un-repersentable with a ratio of 7:2 for males to females which is a significant gender imbalance. But this has been overcome by the amount of overall awakenings which summed up to 375 awakenings. As the physiology of the brain is similar in all people we don't need a large sample which is why the sample size is ideal. Both Qualitative and Quantitative data was used; quantitative data was collected by the means of the EEG \and Qualitative data was collected via the description of the dreams. The study was useful as it allowed us to see if there was any correlation between sleep and our eye movement. However it’s not a general sable study as it did take place in controlled conditions therefore its usefulness can be argued.

It is a reductionist study as it gives a biological explanation of the narrow focus, which is that dreaming is simply a product of REM sleep.

♥♥♥

Hope this was helpful. If you have any question please ask and as the exams aren’t far away id encourage past papers for region purposes which for this course can be found on the OCR Website: Core Studies Past Papers Code G542 and Psychological Investigations code is G541

Core Studies| Developmental Psychology| Samuel and Bryant (1983)

Background to the study...

My  name is Jean Piaget and i see children as active little scientists as they learn by exploring their own thinking .

Jean Piaget is a famous psychologist being one of the first psychologist studying cognitive development in children. Piaget wasn't only interested in what children could do or couldn't but why they made the mistakes they did.  Through the aid of imaginative tasks Piaget was able to establish  an insight into children's thought processes. His conclusion was children's thinking was not the same as adults and that cognition (thinking) was a development that is learned and not what is biological.

For your Exam you will need to know the different stages that Piaget established and the ages at which the stages occur apart from the pre-operational stage as this is the main focus of P and S&B studies. :

Sensorimotor - this happened between 0-18 months ( senses)
Pre-Operational- this stage happens between 18 months-7 years and this is when symbols (I.E words) and general rules become important .
Concrete Operational- this happens between 7-12 years
Formal Operational - 12+ years

Piaget focused his study on the pre-operational stage as he said that children at that age can not CONSERVE- the ability of understanding that if shape if something is physically changed it has the same mass, volume or number. Or REVERSE MENTAL OPERATION- the acceptance only of what is observed in present so wouldn't believe that water in liquid form came from an ice cube.

His founding had a tremendous impact on teaching in the 1960-70's with his founding provided evidence that children are motivated to learn better when they when they explore thinking with to the extent of what stage they're in.

Piaget experimented on children aged between 5-8 years of age where he showed children two rows of counters containing the same amount of counters in each row and asked children if both rows had the same number of coins in the rows.This was known as the pre-transformational question. Then Piaget spaced out the coins on one row transforming the appearance of the rows. Then he asked whether the rows had the same number of coins in the rows. Children according to Piagets stages cant conserve or reverse mental operation so they would say that the number of coins on both rows are the same in the post-transformational question however they don't understand that when you physically transform one row the number of coins stayed the same so would say that the numbers in the post transformational questions would be different. Which  proves Piagets theory.

However critics of Piagets Experiment Rose and Blank(1974) would suggest that asking two questions could be proven confusing to children so therefore even if the children thought that the number of coins was the same post transformation asking the question twice would make the child think that the first answer they given was wrong which given the basis for Samuels and Bryant's study.

Asking Only One Question In The Conservation Experiment(1983)

Aim

♥ To test the hypothesis that asking only one question in the conservation task would lead to more correct answers.

Participants

Samuel and Bryant picked 252 boys and girls from a variety of schools and preschools in Devon. They were placed into four age controlled groups (A(5.3),B(6.3),C(7.3) and D(8.3))- 21 children in each of the groups) with 63 children in each group. these four groups were then divided into three experimental conditions which were

Standard Piaget 

- pre and post transformation were asked 

One Judgement 

- Shown transformation but only asked one question 

Fixed Array 

- Only shown post transformation and asked one question

84 children was subjected to each of the conditions above.

Each trial was repeated 4 times making a total of 12 trials per child so that researchers could make sure that the results were not due to chance factors, children also experienced only one of the conditions making it an independent measures design. Tasks were also shown at random to reduce the possibility of order effects.

Independent Variables

- age of the participants (5.3,6.3,7.3,8.3)

- experimental condition the children were in (fixed array, one judgement, standard Piaget)

- material used in the conservation task(number-coins, mass-plasticine, volume- liquid in a glass)

Findings

The way the researchers recorded the findings was due to the number of errors the child made. an error was an incorrect statement about the changes in volume, mass or number.

At age 5.3 in the Standard Piaget children scored 8.5, in One-Judgement children scored,7.3 and in the Fixed Array children scored 8.6.

At age 6.3 in the Standard Piaget children scored 5.7, in One-Judgement children scored 4.3 and in Fixed Array children scored 6.4.

At age 7.3 in the Standard Piaget children scored 3.2, in One-Judgement children scored 2.3 and in Fixed Array children scored 4.9.

At age 8.3 in the Standard Piaget children scored 1.7, in One-Judgement children scored 1.3 and in 
Fixed Array children scored 3.3.

 Findings against the IVs

- Age: number of errors decreases with the age going up which shows that the ability to conserve gets significantly better with age.

- Experimental Condition: The mean number of errors is lower for the One Judgement condition (where only pre-transformational question had been asked.)

- Material tested in the conservation tasks: Overall the data shown below presents findings for third variable; it can be seen that children are more successful and so make fewer errors when conserving number compared with volume or mass. 

In the conservation tasks data recorded was recorded on the same principle as the finding were recorded.

In conservation of Mass children in the Standard Piaget scored 1.5, children in One Judgement scored 1.2 and children in Fixed Array scored 1.7.

In the conservation of Number children in the Standard Piaget scored 1.5, children in One Judgement scored 1.0 and in Fixed Array 1.5.

In the conservation of Volume children in the Standard Piaget scored 1.8, children in One Judgement scored 1.6 and in Fixed Array 2.5.

Conclusions:

- Children can conserve better than Piaget initialised in the first place , this could be due to the presentation of questions ( Asking 1 or 2 questions) , asking 2 questions clearly confused the child and created demand characteristics in that if the question is asked twice even if the child thought that their answer was correct both times they are going to assume that the answer they gave the first time must be wrong so say a different answer because they think that's what the researcher is wanting to know.
- The results from Fixed Array condition clearly shows that the transformation needs to be shown in order to understand conservation fully. This is evidenced by the highest number of errors in the fixed array conditions, however did best in one judgement because of the transformation shown which provides child with sufficient knowledge to prove that the material didn't change.

Evaluation 

The researchers were using 3 iv's which is a strength as it allows a cause and effect relationship to be established and the researcher is therefore able to pin point the factors affecting results e.g. as you get older you can conserve better. Also by using an experimental design researchers were able to achieve high levels of control. However because the experiment was a laboratory experiment it happened in a non-naturalistic environment so the results that were obtained could be due to demand characteristics and as in a non naturalistic environment are not true to life this means that this study has low ecological validity.

Overall the study is highly ethical although it was an unusual procedure the possibility of the distress of children was faint.

The sample obtained by Samuel and Bryant was large and could be considered as representative, ages covered the time period in which Piaget said that children cant conserve so it allowed researchers to investigate where conservation begins if an age range wasn't used  than the effect of age could not be tested. Although all the children studied were from one area in England  which could be criticised for being un representative due to its ethnocentric nature as results could have been different in different parts of England or more so different countries over the whole world .

The type of data collected was Quantitative which allowed the creation of statistics which could indicate the probability that results were due to the different change factors.

The research was useful in a few ways,but most importantly it showed us that children's development is affected by the environmental influences, in this case the way the questions were asked affected the response.

Core Studies| Cognitive Psychology| Loftus and Palmer (1947): Reconstruction of auto mobile destruction: An example of interaction between language and memory

A bit  of background information

Elizabeth Loftus

Loftus and Palmer were primarily interested in researching how language and more so how the verbs in leading questions effected our memory, Such a study would be beneficial to the police force in their interviewing training.

Aim

 The aim of their study was to observe if the nature of a question had an effect of the answer given (leading questions); but more specifically how changing the verb in the sentence effected speed estimates,

Methodology

Loftus and Palmer created two separate laboratory experiments; which allowed them to maintain a high degree of control however with the nature if this experiment you can expect there to be a low ecological validity ( blog post on it is here).

Experiment 1

The participants consisted of 45 students randomly split into 5 groups. These stuident watched 7 film clips of traffic accidents ( which were obtained from a Seattle safety agency). Each of the clips varied in length of between 5-30 seconds. After viewing each of the film clips, they were given a questionnaire. This questionnaire consisted of 2 questions, the first one asking participants to describe what they have just seen and secondly the critical question (now, the critical question had a different verb for each one of the groups)

Group 1: About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?

Group 2: About how fast were the cars going when they collided with each other?

Group 3: About how fast were the cars going when they bumped each other?

Group 4: About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?

Group 5: About how fast were the cars going when they contacted with each other?

IMPORTANT: PARTICIPANTS DID NOT KNOW LOFTUS AND PALMER CHANGED THE VERB IN THE CRITICAL QUESTION, APART FROM THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS HAD BEEN SHOWN THE SAME 7 FILM CLIPS AND THE SAME QUESTION WAS ASKED APART FROM THE CRITICAL QUESTION,

Changing the verb in fact was the Independent Variable, there fore any differences in the results would be due to this very change

Findings

Loftus and Palmer predicted that with the higher intensity of the verb the higher the estimate and their results did present that same idea,

Estimated Speeds By Verb in mph (miles per hour)

Smashed     = 40.8 
Collided      = 39.3
Bumped      = 38.1
Hit               = 34.0
Contacted   = 31.8

It is therefore clear that by these results L&P ( Loftus and Palmer) were able to distort the memories of participants by using clear explanations for two reasons.

•  L&P were able to distort the memories of the participants as the information received after the event had become a part  of the memory
• Or the fact that the memory wasn't distorted or influenced by the verb at all it was actually due to  demand characteristics ( what the researchers wanted to know)

Experiment 2

Experiment 2 was based upon experiment 1 although it was different in the way it was carried out. It was basically used to provide additional information about the origin of the estimates,

Methodology 

A 150 students were used this time which is a very much bigger sample than in the first experiment, these students were asked to view a 1 min long video which contained a 4 sec, scene of a multiple car accident, and were then asked about it.

This time 3 conditions were used and the IV is the same as the last experiment where by the verb is manipulated,

50 participants were asked: How fast  were the cars going when they hit each other?
50 participants were asked: How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?
50 participants were the control group and weren't asked anything regarding the speed of the cars.

A week post the experiments the participants returned and were asked without watching the film again, a series of questions. This time the critical question was 'Did you see any broken glass?' this question was a part of longer questions which were placed in a random position on each participants question paper, The participants weren't aware that there actually wasn't any glass in the film. 

Results

Did you see any smashed glass?

Response                          Smashed                            Hit                                  Control

YES                                      16                                    7                                         6

NO                                        34                                   43                                       44

The  results have shown that the verb did have a miss-perception of glass in the film, In fact the participants in the smashed group were twice as likely to recall seeing broken glass

Explanation Of Results

L&P came up with a Reconstructive Hypothesis as an Explanation of the results for the second experiment,

They Argue that we have 2 types of information going to our memories in any type of event, these are :

Firstly perceiving the event which we were in (in the L&P study this is witnessing the video of a car crash), The second type is the other information obtained after the event (the hit and smash groups,)

Overtime these two pieces of information will become unified in a way in which it will be hard to establish from which source the specific detail came from, as we all just have one memory. In the case of L&P participants first were asked questions about what they have witnessed in the video, then by asking About How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other? the experimenters were giving participants extra information, by saying that the cars smashed into each other  there for witnessing the car crash and then the fact that the cars smashed into each-other unified this information,and the memory of the car crash was more severe, thus participants in the smashed condition were more likely to to say that the broken glass was present in the scene.

Evaluation

Contribution to Psychology:

Loftus's Devlin Report in 1976 has meant that the trial judge is required to instruct the jury that it is not safe to convict on a single eye witness testimony, except in exceptional circumstances or when substantial corroborative evidence is present,However some psychologists argue that whilst loftus' research has proven beneficial to the judiciary and police system with the re constructive hypothesis has meant that police and lawyers are urged to use as few leading questions as possible, this is still widely carried out regardless of the research, Additionally, Some psychologists also suggest that it is not purely the type of question that is asked it is also many other factors involved, these include: food, alcohol, emotions, the environment you were in, what the event meant to you , who you were with etc.

Method:

Everyone saw the same films regardless of the questions asked, By using a Lab Experiment has meant that a high level of control was easily obtainable which allowed the researches to separate the IV from the DV and see if it is only the IV that was effecting the DV. Overall the researchers had control over everything inc. :age of participants, the videos shown and locations of experiment. Participants also had the same questions apart from the model conditions and critical q. in experiment 1.However participants were often looking for clues from researchers from how to behave or hoe a response which created demand characteristics, thus outcome of the experiment could have been influential on the outcome of the experiment, Some psychologist suggest that the witnesses merely followed the questionnaire leaving the original memory intact for retrieval under appropriate conditions. Also when witnessing events in real life we often have some involvement with the people or the action therefore it should be difficult to generalise findings.

Participants:

The sample of participants was fairly large especially in the second experiment, which allowed the results to be implied to the group of participants in the research (Students).However students are very different from the general public as they are used to remembering useless information and are usually better at memory test from having to do them at college/ university and generally having a better memory capacity. They are also likely to be inexperienced drivers. This has meant that any data collected is not able to be generalised to the rest of the public.

Type of Data Collected:

Qualitative data was collected which is useful for making statistical analysis. However we didnt have any motive for giving qualitative data and we are unsure of how confident the participants were with their estimates which would therefore produce invalid data; as a way to combat this from occuring again participants could put in a rating scale style question which would allow participants to give the confidence rating,

Ethics:

No ethical guidelines were broken as participants gave informed consent and they were in a controlled environment. However participants could potentially have been caused distress through viewing the car crash clips as it is not particularly pleasant to watch , additionally participants may have been a part of a car accident or someone they new could have been a victim of or a part of one which in this case it could be found to be particularly distressing to participants,

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

This is revision material for the OCR course of AS Psychology . This content has been created with the help of the revision website at : http://www.holah.co.uk as well as booklets created by teachers at my school for use in lessons. 

♥Core Studies| Social Psychology| Rethinking the Psychology of tyranny: Reicher and Haslam BBC Prison Study 2006♥

Reicher and Haslam initiated their experimental case study to examine the consequences of randomly dividing a group of men into prisoners and guards. They aimed to recreate Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment in a more ethical way.They made 3 predictions before the study which stated the following:

1. Is a persons belief about the opportunity of movement between groups ( permeability - if this is low it is said that there is greater value and respect shown between group members)
2. is a persons belief about the legitimacy of the group inequalities(will members challenge status if they thought it to be unfair)
3. Cognitive Alternative being available to group members (this occurs when lower status group members are made of possible alternatives in which they may be able to change their status, 

Aims

♥ Reicher and Haslam wanted to create a social situation where by they could conduct a situation similar to that of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment they did this by :

• Looking at how a group of individuals of unequal power and privilege act with one another
• Developing practical and Ethical Guidelines for large scale social-psychology studies.
• Examining the impact of factors that affect group behaviour 
• Analysing the factors that lead individuals to identify with their  group members,

Procedure

♥ Reicher and Haslam decided to do this study in the style of an experimental case study ( this is because it wasnt quite and experiment, however there was still IV's involved although the research consisted fully of intensive observation of one group of people.

♥ R and H had control over almost every aspect of the social situation.

♥A repeated measures design is used which meant that all participants went through all experimental conditions ( for a more thorough explanation of repeated measures design click here) 

♥ this situational prison was situated in the BBC Studios in London  and was aimed to function for 10 days where by the participants were divided into prisoners(10) and guards (5)

Participants

♥ There was an initial pool of 332 participants which were self selected from a newspaper article which was put in the national paper. The researchers wanted to study a group of diverse applicants through; age, race, social class. Unstable applicants were withdrawn from the study via a 3 stage screening process. At each stage the participants who are seen as unstable were removed.

The Screening Process

The participants went through the initial Psychometric Tests

• Participants were being tested on Social Variables (such as their dominance, racism and authoritarianism ) and Clinical Variables (such as depression, paranoia and self esteem) - those with extreme levels of either variable were eliminated from the study

They then went through a full weekends Clinical Analysis carried out by a clinical psychologists at their home to ensure participants suitability.

Medical and Character referencing was the last screening process this is where participants history and past experiences were research including any criminal records/ police checks.

There was a few ways in which researchers made sure the selection process worked on different levels.

• Ethics were met by only allowing well adjusted participants to be included in the study 
• The sample was representative of the populations as the results wanted to be generalised 
• Diversity is available through the assured diversity if age , social class and ethnic background of all participants
• Gender Ethics were met through using a pure male sample to allow comparison to the SPE and also avoiding men and women in the same cell
• Also all Participants were matched on personality variables 10 were prisoners and 5 were guards the roles were randomly chosen

Guards Uniform And their demonstration of power over prisoners 

• Guards (5) were taken to a hotel the night before the experiment was initiated and were told about the basic principles of what they were expected to do which was to keep prisoners in order, not to use any physical punishment and then guards were then told to come up with rules for the prison and punishments for the fail to comply with those rules.
• The Guards wore a uniform which consisted of a smart blue shirt, a tie, black trousers, black shoes and also wore keys.
• The way the guards demonstrated power was by the fact that because they owned and you could see the keys they were seen as having control over prisoners so having the power
• They generally had a better uniform to the prisoners and access to better food and snacks and drinks whenever they wanted and therefore accounted a position that would appeal to those in a lower position therefore the prisoners.

Prisoners Uniform 

• The prisoners(9/10) wore a uniform which consisted of  loose fitting orange trousers and t-shirt and flimsy sandals. The t shirt had 3 digits printed on them and also had their heads shaven upon arrival,
• Their diets were kept at a reasonable standard but were not anything compared to the guards meals and had basic ethical rights

Independent and Dependent Variables 

The IV's were manipulated on certain days of the study, and the DV's were measured by social variables (such as sociological identification), organisational variables ( participants compliance with rules) -measured by self reports and also clinical variables ( levels of stress) measured by daily saliva swabs for  a hormone called cortisol. 

• 1st IV DAY 3: PERMEABILITY OF ROLES

 What permeability means is basically the ability of movement between groups of people which ultimately is permeability is low increases groups identity. 

Summary of the day; Guards (5) and prisoners (9) told promotion to guards was made possible due to miss assigned prisoners. As group boundaries are permeable between prisoner and guards  there has been a lack of social identity  as prisoners realise that they could be in a group with better standards of living so work as individuals rather than a group. after day three when the promotion of one prisoner takes place this was made impermeable this meant that prisoner and guard roles were reinforced and thus prisoners then built a strong identity between them, however there was low identity between guards as many of them did not want to be in their position.

• 2nd IV DAY 6 : LEGITIMACY OF  ROLES( cognitive alternitives when TU prisoner was withdrawn)

This is where participants would question the division of the groups division .

3 days after promotion took place day 6, participants were informed that there was now no difference between prisoners and guards but changing groups back to the original ones chosen would be impractical on that same day the TU prisoner was remove from the study to check that participants actually took a cognitive alternative. Guards remained with their anti- confrontational approach which worked for everyone apart from the cell 2 inmates that night  3 prisoners escaped and guards showed levels of stress. Therefore those prisoners that separated had raised their group identity and separated from guards which created confrontation, which therefore increased rivalry between the prisoners which made three of the prisoners broke out due to their strong identification. Guards therefore became more unified and prisoners became more separated.

• 3rd IV DAY 5-7: COGNITIVE ALTERNATIVES 

A Cognitive Alternative is basically an alternative way of thinking .

a TRADE UNION OFFICIAL  got introduced to the prison as the final 10th prisoner and became one of the most respected and feared prisoners.which reduced the conflict between prisoner and guard. Prisoner and guards  questioned their roles however prisoners acknowledged that they have rights within their group but questioned the acceptability of their conditions. All guards at this point had equal status but you could see leaders of the group developing, with the socially identified group as prisoners they cooperated well as a group, and created a commune which worked initially until 3 dissenters decided that the commune system wasn't for them, they broke out of the cell on the night of day 6, and prisoners  who were one of strongest leader decided that they wanted to introduce a new much harsher regime which due to ethical reasons did not go ahead and the experiment was stopped on day six,

Findings and Criticisms

• Guards failed to identify with each other, this is because although the high status created a desirable role not all members wanted to be guards so felt uncomfortable with the given power hence low social identity as all members had different views and values.
• Prisoners were mostly compliant at the start of experiment as wanted to move up to guard position however after permeability of roles was demolished they unified together as a group, this is because at the beginning they wanted to work up to being a guard as there was more benefit from this role however after  this became impermeable prisoners decided to work together to change their position.
• Guards failed to work together and disagreed about their role within the prison as not all guards have had the same level of authoritarianism in their  personality in which members with low authoritarianism struggled to keep the system reinforced, and also alone time was spent separately which meant that they couldn't really identify with one another,
• when all participants were informed that no differences in group characteristics were present prisoners overthrew guards and their relationship was destroyed a new self governing commune was established by the majority of the prisoners and staff but deserters didn't like it as didn't really see a point it the running off it ,
• After the breakdown of the commune a mixed group of original guards and prisoners decided to impose a new  regime  with  harsher rules and punishment so  the prison could have run the way it should have been run from the start . 

Criticisms 

1. Procedure was standardised and happened in a controlled environment. However the procedure lacked in ecological validity and demand characteristics was present
2. Daily psychometric and cortisol tests allowed to know for real if participants began to be effected by the study which was an improvement from Zimbardos study and allowed full detailed explanations to be carried out. However withdrawal could have been difficult to achieve as the prisoners were locked in cells, if new regime was to continue similar situation could have happened to SPE if continued, also the nature of the experiment was seen as degrading to participants. 
3. self selected sample was a good things as the screening process allowed participants who were strong enough to withstand the study through . Males were used to allow comparison to SPE, also there was a range of age, social class and ethnic background which is something that the SPE didn't have.   However there was a small sample size which meant the results were low on reliability and also couldn't be generalised to women.
4. Both Qualitative and Quantitative data was recorded, Qualitative data was filmed on 24 hour surveillance which meant that behaviours couldn't be missed and also along side quantitative data it helped us to establish a cause and effect relationship and allowed easy comparison between groups. However participants weren't given responses as to why they chose the answers they chose in the self-rating scale which meant that their though wasn't expressed and also as it is an observational method observers are likely to be subjective so a number of observers must be present to increase inter-rater reliability.
5. Overall the study accomplished their aims which has allowed large scale studies to be performed ethically, results were easily comparable to the SPE  and allowed to see that there was other variables effecting how they identify with their role they don't automatically get on with the role like what Zimbardo thought, On the other hand as the study was committed in artificial settings it lacked in ecological validity and therefore reliability and also as the study didn't go through till the end it cant project reliable results 

♥Core Studies| Social Psychology| Pilliavin et.al. (1969) Subway Samaritan♥

Pillavin carried out a field experiment to investigate helping behaviour towards different type of victims. After the tragic murder of  Kitty Genovese in New York(1964), Social Psychologist became particularly interested in investigating this particular type of behaviour as it is said that around 40 people witnessed or heard Kitty's struggle but not one person helped until 30 mins after the attack when kitty had already passed away.

This is where psychologist tested bystander apathy (the case in which people do not offer help when there's others present) and the situations that made others help rather than not. First type of research method used lab experiments were used were participants were put in scenarios like being in a smoke filled room and the alarm went off they would test to see what type of people would sound off and alarm (Latane and Darley 1968). Piliavin recognised that such experiments lacked ecological validity and there for constructed a field experiment that would investigate real life behaviours in an every day  situation.

Aims and Independent and Dependent Variables
The aim of the study was to investigate factors which affect our helping behaviour the factors picked for this study were:
- Responsibility of the victim
- Race of the victim
- effect of modelling
- effect of the size of the group

The Variables

Independent Variables:
- Type of victim ( drunk or ill)
- The race of the victims( black or white)
- Presence of model ( early or late)
- Number of bystanders( varied naturally)

Dependent Variables:
- Time taken for the next passenger to help
- Total number of passengers who helped
- Gender/race/ Location of every helper
- The time taken for each passenger to offer help after model had assisted

Other measurements taken:
- Movement of passengers out of the critical area
- gender/race/location of passengers in the critical area
- spontaneous comments made by the passenger.

Researchers predicted that the person who was drunk would receive less help than the person in the cane condition, the race of the victim was predicted to affect the rate of helping as the person was more likely to help own race, helping was more likely to happen if a model is present. researchers thought it would be useful to predict behaviour using the conditions under which bystanders would/ wouldn't offer to help using a Heuristic Device which is a framework that can be used to predict behaviour.

Method

Trains A&D of  Eighth Avenue IDN NYC were selected as no stops were made between 59th and
125th street so there was a captive audience for 7.5 mins who became the bystanders after 70 second. Overall 4450 men and women who used the trains between 11.00-15.00 between 14/04/-26/06/1968. 45% were black and the mean number of people per cart was 43, how ever the mean number in the critical area was 8,
4 teams of students were used in this study in each individual group there were two males and females) the victim used was aged between 26-35 dressed in jackets and trousers no ties . 4 models were aged 24-29 wore informal clothes and were dressed identically, all of the confederates boarded the trains on through differnt doors, the females sat down and took the notes whilst the models stood up and the victim stood next to the central pole.

-          If victim received no help model would help to feet and exit the train until other passengers of train leave.6-8 trials were run on the same condition, when model provided assistance raised the victim to a sitting position and stayed with him for a remainder of a trial.

-          Drunk condition: 38 trials the victims smelt of alcohol and carried a brown bag, cane victim: 65 trials appeared sober and carried a black cane, early model stood in the critical area and helped after 70sec late helped after 150 sec

-          Early model/ adjacent model stood in area adjacent to critical area same for late/ adjacent

-          On each trial race, sex and location was noted + everyone in carriage. 2^nd coded race sex and location of every person in adjacent area. Both also recorded spontaneous comments by passengers standing next to them.

Findings and Conclusion

©      Helping were much higher than earlier labatory experiments so not possible to investigate behaviours of models helping as were helped before model on majority of trials

©      Cane victim received help on 62/65 trials whilst drunk received help on 19/38 trials of the spontaneous helpers 90% were male

©      Tendency for the same-race helping was frequent this increased  when victim was drunk compared to ill

©      No strong relationship between the no of bystanders and speed of helping diffusion of responsibility increased when more passengers on board

©      The longer the emergency continued without help being offered:

-          The less impact the model had on helping behaviour

-          The more likely individuals left the immediate area to avoid the situation

-          The more likely it was that observers discussed the incident and its implications

©      More comments on the drunk rather than ill made.

©      Arousal Cost Reward model:

-          Observation of emergency created emotional arousal in bystander this is higher on the level you empathise with the individual, the closer to emergency, longer the emergency without given help. Reduced by helping directly, going to get help, leaving the scene of emergency, rejecting victim as undeserving of help     

Evaluation

©       study can be criticised on ethics: participants can’t give consent, they are being deceived as the situations isn’t real, participants not debriefed and also may suffer with feelings of guilt, distress and anxiety

©       Field experiments more difficult to control due to extraneous variables.

©       High level of ecological validity. On the other hand some participants were very close to victim and couldn’t escape from situation thus unlike situations & maybe one of the reasons why diffusion of responsibility didn’t occur

©       Sample size was very large and fairly representative to population of New York Citizens

©       The ACRM is criticised as takes a –ve view on people assumes behaviour is measured by some sort of cost/benefit altruism refers to unselfish behaviours and  thus ACRM says we never behave altruistically

©       40 years on from murder of Kitty there are still ongoing debates on whether the original documenting is accurate.