Issues and debates

Hard determinism (fatalism)

all human behaviour has a cause sho should be possible to identify and describe these causes. everything we do is dictated by internal or external forces we cannot control. free will is an illusion so behaviour is predictable.

soft determinism

all human action has a cause but all have conscious mental control over our behaviour, determining forces only to an extent → cognitive approach

biological determinism

control from physiological, genetic and hormonal processes e.g. influence of autonomic nervous system on anxiety, genes in mental health, testosterone in aggressive behaviour

environmental determinism

determined from conditioning (behaviourist approach). our experiences of choice is a sum total of reinforcement contingencies across lives. behaviour has been shaped by environmental events and agents of socialisation.

psychic determinism

directed by unconscious conflicts (psychodynamic approach). emphasis on biological drives and instincts underpinning psychological responses rather than conditioning. behaviour’’ determined by unconscious conflicts repressed in childhood.

causal explanations

• every event has a cause which can be explained using general laws.

• means scientists can predict and control events.

• lab experiment to demonstrate causal effect and removes extraneous variables.

free will

human beings are essentially self-determining and free to choose own thoughts and actions. there are biological and environmental forces that exert some influence but can reject these forces as in control.

evaluating free will

face validity/ makes sense as fits experience because we are constantly making choices.

thinking we have free will even if we don’t has a positive impact on behaviour
- internal locus of control: more mentally healthy
- Robert: adolescents with a string belief in fatalism were more at risk of depression. thought lives were decided by events outside their control.

Brain studies, Libet and Soon: found the brain activity related to the decision to press a button with the left or right hand occurs up to 10s before Ps report being consciously aware of making such a decision.
- predetermined by our brain before we become aware of decision

→ just because this thought comes before the conscious awareness of the decision to act does not mean there was no decision, just took time to reach consciousness. simply a read out of our unconscious decision making.

evaluating determinism

human behaviour is orderly and obeys laws playing psychology with other established sciences increasing credibility.

prediction and control of human behaviour has led to the development of treatments and therapies e.g. drug treatment to manage sz

experience of psychological disorders isn’t chosen

offenders are morally accountable for actions in law (only in extreme circumstances are juries instructed to act with leniency- law of diminished responsibility e.g. psychological disorders)

not falsifiable as based on idea that causes of behaviour will always exist just not found yet. this is impossible to disprove so not scientific.

interactionism, soft determinism

Bandura (SLT) argue that although environmental factors in learning are key, we are free to choose who or what to attend to and when to perform certain behaviours.

helping in understanding aspects mixing free will and determinism e.g. learning

nomothetic approach

studies of large groups

generalisations can produce general laws on behaviour

scientific method to assess people and then analysed for significance

future behaviour can then be predicted or controlled

standardisation → true replication → across samples

e.g. behaviourist approach (laws of learning), biological approach (repeated testing e.g. Sperry- hemispheric lateralisation)

evaluation of nomothetic approach

can generalise to wider population

methods are objective, measurable and standardised increasing credibility of science, internal validity and replication

significant impact on society e.g. predicting impact of serotonin through scientific study → SSRIs for depression

generalised laws may not always apply to an individual so lacks ecological validity

understanding is superficial because it overlooks the richness of human experience e.g. same score on a personality test but different answers. scientific risk of sz 1% but does not explain condition.

• subjective experience useful for devising appropriate treatments.

idiographic approach (and example)

studies the unique individual

number of participants very small e.g. case study

investigative experiences in detail to help us understand behaviour

rich qualitative data (subjective)

e.g. humanistic approach (self development and unconditional positive regard from conversations in therapy), psychodynamic approach (studies of individuals led to explanations of human nature e.g. little hans)

evaluation of idiographic approach

gains detailed and informative descriptions of behaviour to uncover causes

develop holistic understanding

can provide hypotheses for future scientific studies

narrow and restricted so not able to generalise because of small samples so lacks external validity

• Oedipus complex just off little hans

methods are subjective flexible and unstandardised so replication, prediction and control of behaviour hard.

open to researcher bias so lacks internal validity.

interaction between nomothetic and idiographic

• we should consider both perspectives because they are complimentary. we can gain a full understanding through developing laws and looking at individuals.

• for example: HM suffered amnesia so could not develop semantic or episodic long term memories but still had memories and learn new procedural ones.

→ helped reveal different ltm memory stores and different areas of the brain.

Holism

looks at the system as a whole (whole is greater than the sum of parts)

e.g. humanistic approach: individual’s experience cannot be reduced

reductionism

breaking down behaviour to parts (parsimony- explained using most basic level)

levels of explanation

e.g. ocd

several ways to explain which become more reductionist

social and cultural

psychological

physiological/ biological

e.g. ocd: interrupts social life, excessive anxiety, abnormal frontal lobes, low levels of serotonin

biological reductionism

explaining behaviour on a biological level e.g. neurochemicals, genes etc.

• ocd caused by low serotonin

environmental reductionism

all behaviour is learnt and acquired through interactions with the environment (stimulus and response)

e.g. phobias- classic and operant conditioning

evaluating holism

some human behaviour can only be understood at the whole context e.g. conformity to social roles

• studying the individuals’ themselves would not allow you to see the effect of situation or interaction within the group

• holistic approach allows for a complete picture

lack of scientific explanation e.g. humanistic approach is based on abstract concepts which cannot adequately explain human behaviour

not practical as looking at so many factors means it is hard to identify which factor is most influential and which one to then base treatment on or prioritise in therapy. therefore does not lead to development of practical effective treatments for mental health disorders e.g. depression: past, relationship, family, serotonin levels, negative thought processes

evaluating reductionism

consistent with the aims of science to predict and control behaviour. breaking down behaviour into smaller parts allows it to be operationalised and then manipulated to see cause and effect relationships between variables. helps us to be more scientifically credible and objective.

e.g. strange situation → attachment → separation anxiety

development of powerful and effective drug therapies e.g. ssris to treat depression based on the view that a deficiency in serotonin can cause depression. has a positive impact on day to day lives.

oversimplifies and ignores complexities of human behaviours. leads to loss of validity as ignores the social context which gives the behaviour meaning e.g. speaking would be the same across all scenarios in terms of biological mechanisms (tongue and vocal cords) but ignores social context e.g. alerting someone, voicing an opinion → oversimplifies complex phenomenon.

Bias in terms of gender

Tendency to treat one individual or group in a different way from others. gender bias means not accurately representing the experience and behaviour of men and women.

Universality

applying the results of research to all people. biased research due to historical and social context creates a subjective view which undermines claims of objective universality.

Beta bias

ignore or underestimates differences

e.g. only use male Ps yet generalised to women

• fight or flight: assumes male and females respond to threatening situations with fight or flight but research only been done on men. TAYLOR: tend and befriend response in women as have high oxytocin especially when stressed. → research minimises gender differences and misinterprets women’s behaviour.

Alpha bias

differences between the sexes is real but over exaggerated usually undervaluing women.

e.g. freud, psychosexual development, phallic stage: boys and girls develop a desire for oppositely gendered parent. creates castration anxiety in boys and is resolved when boy identifies with fathers. girls identification with mother is weaker (not out of fear) so superego is weaker and women morally inferior.

androcentrism (leads to alpha and beta bias)

male domination

normal behaviour is judged according to male standards so female behaviour is seen as abnormal or pathologized (seen as an illness)

• pre-menstrual system: leads to strong emotion. but stereotypes women as irrational and at mercy of hormones while male anger is seen as rational.

discussion on gender bias

• could lead to incorrect assumptions about female behaviour. could provide scientific justification to deny women opportunities in the workplace. e.g. due to PMS which could have long lasting consequences for women affecting lives and prospects.

• gender bias promotes sexism in the research process. women remain underrepresented in university departments despite undergraduate intake being mainly women. research is more likely to be conducted by men which may disadvantage female ps and expectations of women being irrational lead to women underperforming. structures and methods → gender biased.

• awareness of gender bias means current researchers are more careful when designing their studies and developing their theories to avoid gender bias. led to studies that explore gender like studying a lack of women in top end jobs. criteria should be followed to avoid gender bias.
  - feminist psychology: diversity between groups of women should be explored not just comparisons between male and female.