issues and debates

culture bias AO3

Alpha and beta bias can be used in AO1

- not all behaviours suffer from culture bias: universal behaviours like interactional synchrony, reciprocity, body language

- leads to stereotypes and discrimination

+ development of native and cross cultural research

+ development of technology and travel had led to globalisation of psychology

socially sensitive research AO3

ethical implications: impact a theory has on participants, the way results are communicated to and used by the public

seiber and stanley researchers have moral duty to conduct such research as they often have positive outcomes

• research question

• conduct of research and treatment of ppts

• institutional context (may only publish research that gives profit, funding allocation)

• interpretation and application beyond research by policymakers and media

> milgram and deception, 99% unharmed because of benefit for world

> confidentiality more important

- impact of research is difficult to predict

- can be used for social control (Bowlby + gender roles; Milgram + obedience)

- research may become less objective

+ ignoring socially sensitive research is damaging and unscientific (may inhibit development of treatments or identifying harmful behaviour)

free will vs determinism AO3

+ treatments developed from determinism (biological for schizophrenia and OCD, environmental for phobias); counterargue: doesn’t assess all aspects of behaviour

- determinism has negative implications in legal field and conviction; counterargue: free will is consistent with it

- opposing research for free will by Libet: use of EEGs and clocks to measure ‘readiness potential’ of brain during decision making, readiness potential occurred 0.5 seconds before ppts consciously decided to push a button; counterargue: cause or effect? brain activity much faster than any other concept of behaviour, may be that signals detected were an effect of the conscious decisions rather than the cause

+ free will has face validity and better understood for everyday human behaviour; counterargue: Skinner says free will is an illusion

+ humanistic approach for free will, incl hierarchy of needs and self actualisation; counterargue: individualistic approach of full potential

reductionism vs holism AO1 + AO3

3 levels of reductionism: social cultural, psychological (cognitive, behavioural, environmental), biological

machine reductionism in cognitive approach

Gestalt argues for holism

+ treatments for disorders develop from reductionist approach; counterargue: doesn’t assess all factors involved eg extreme cases of depression and schizophrenia despite its 0.7 hereditary coefficient score and concordance rates

+ reductionism is scientific, collects qualitative data for better analysis and significance, Wundt used reductionism in introspection + historical significance of psychology as a science as a result; counterargue: introspection was unreliable despite standardisation and required more information to understand internal mental processes, levels of reductionism can only be applied for certain aspects in behaviour not all

- reductionism is dehumanising as it ignores complex interactions of behaviour; counterargue: interactionist approach for understanding and treating behaviour