issues and debates

Gender Bias AO1

“When psychological theory offers a view that does not justifiably represent the experience or behaviour of men/women, based on stereotypes and not real evidenced differences”

Psychology has started as a male dominated field. So most gender bias is unfair to women. This means gender bias results in research not representing up to half the population.

Beta bias leads to androcentrism/gynocentrism → using male behaviour as the standard all behaviour is compared on. Perpetuates stereotypes and leads to non-male behaviour being seen as abnormal. This disvalues other gender experiences/misdiagnosis

Two types:

Alpha: exaggerates differences (Freud and phallic phase, where girls identify less than boys with fathers, so weaker morals)

Beta: minimises/ignores difference (fight or flight assumed for all, but taylor saw women tended to show tend/befriend due to higher oxytocin levels)

Gender Bias AO3

1. results in essentialism; believing gender differences are fixed when they aren’t. E.g. common sterotype that women have better verbal abilities, men better spatial. However, Joel argues using brain scans that there are no structural differences, men are not necessarily doers and women speakers. so it is socially sensitive.

2. psychology struggles with making non gender biased research due to women being underrepresented in psychological research teams. (e.g. uni departments). since researchers are human and have biases, likely that they will assume women will act one way, esp. if it’s men. so results in inaccurate results that lack int. validity and make sterotypes

3. countering this via methods: reflexivity, less biased samples, women in research.

idiographic and nomothetic AO1

NOMOTHETIC:

Nomo means “laws” in Greek. Based on quantitative data which is subjected to inferential stats, letting us make inferences about general laws in human behaviour. Biological approach uses scientific methods to identify trends and form causal laws, e.g. low MAOA causing aggression. Systems of diagnosis like DSM and ICD are all nomothetic

IDIOGRAPHIC:

Idios means “own” in greek. They believe everyone is a tabula rasa (blank slate), and we are all individual and unique and universal laws never truly apply. Mostly anti-science, and uses qualitative data. Uses case studies, journal entries, thematic analysis. Humanistic approaches suggests we are all unique so using universal laws is reducing the complexities of human nature.

Idiographic and Nomothetic AO3

False Distinction: no ‘one best way’, need to combine both. I.e. biological approach still uses case studies, humanistic approach still has universal laws (hierarchy)

NOMOTHETIC:

Very scientific: relies on experimental methods, control, etc. Allows replicability. supports psych as a science. Can help more people e.g. SSRI, since all human behaviour is universal. Talking therapies aren’t accessible for everyone. Helping improve lives of people

IDIOGRAPHIC:

Unscientific: uses qualitative methods, uncontrolled, not replicable.

BUT case studies can generate further research: e.g. KF challenged the MSM, promoting the existence of WMM.

Cultural Bias AO1

tendency to interpret phenomena through perspective of one’s own culture, ignoring the effects culture has on behaviour. 2 types, beta and alpha

cultural bias is result of ethnocentrism, individuals judge cultures from own culture’s standards. at extreme, cultures believe themselves superior, leading to prejudice/discrimination. e.g. SS only shows Western Norm, secure does not reflect other countries like Jpn/Gmn. Jpn - more insecure resistant as rarely separate from mother, Gmn - more avoidant as strong emphasis on independence. the insecure is instead reflecion of cultural norms. thus, case of imposed etic, causing prejudice, appearance that one cultures practices are inferior.

Culture Bias AO3

1. leads to prejudice: IQ tests on Ellis island were ethnocentric, assumed everyone knows about US president names, so some groups had very low scores and were called feeble minded. resuled in eugenic policies, so strong ethical implications

2. prevent cultural bias: emic approach, study behaviour specifically in relation to culture, working with indigenous psychologists. prevent potential misunderstandings of what is actually culturally normative. also reflexivity, since critical distance hard

3. globalisation: cultural differences not as obvious anymore. migrating between countries is normal, differences have been bridged. Takano and Osaka suggested no evidence of individualism/collectivist when comparing American and Japanese studies, suggesting cultural bias no longer major issue

Ethical Implications

consider the impact/consequences of research on ppt and rights of ppl in wider context, usually a result of socially sensitive research: studies with social consequences for the ppt and people represented/related to the research. this can be used to discriminate, promote prejudice, inform policies which further marginalise. stigma follows group, shaping their experiences, causing self fulfilling prophecy

e.g. Darwin’s theory of evolution influencing relationship behaviour. To prevent cuckoldry, men use aggressive male retention strategies to prevent female infidelity and that this is adaptive. normalises and trivialises domestic abuse, questions if male violence can be blamed/criminalised since it’s ‘adaptive’, in extremes, this may lead to policies not protecting women who are abused, or causing other men to believe they should be more violent since that’s norm.

Ethical Implications AO3

1. methodology: understand consequence of research, if obvious implications then don’t do the research. risks outweigh benefits. ensure confidentiality and anonymity. trans ppl should not have name revealed so they rnt outed. involve the group being researched in research process so info framed sensitively and inform context.

2. socially sensitive can be useful: can inform policies which reduce prejudice/stigma. e.g. homosexuality was listed as disorder in DSM (sociopathic personality disorder). research at the time would be socially sensitive, yet when interviewing 5000 men about their sexual behaviour (Also sensitive as sexual behaviour was not talked about) found that homosexuality is not atypical.

3. sensitive research has dire consequences, e.g. theory of monotropy may result in mothers not reurning to work or lead to social policies around mothers leaving their children for work. so may not be worth it at all

reductionism holism AO1

reduce behaviour to simplest structures (reductionism) or view it as a whole integrated experience (holism).
reductionism - parsimony (breaking down to simplect parts). e.g. biological and environmental reductionism.
holism - ‘holos’ greek word referring to whole. should not simplify behaviour, only understood as whole experience.

Rose: levels of explanation. lowest most reductionist, highest most holistic. e.g. via AN: lowest biological level is genes epoxide hydrolase, biologically reductionist only focusses on bio. psychological level is middle: includes cognitive/behavioural explanations like Williamson finding disturbed perception in those with AN. The highest is social level: considers sociocultural influences such as Western ideals of thinness. The highest is holism, where everything is considered.

reductionism holism AO3

1. supports psych as science unlike holism: breaks behaviour into measurable components so empirical testing can happen. ascertain cause and effect easily. thus can be used to develop treatments. so strong RWA

2. holistic improves on reductionist as it does not oversimplify. appreciates complexity. but not scientific and untestable, neglects lower levels such as biological. difficult to point out specific cause and effect. practical applicability of holism in comparison to reductionism is limited, more a pseudoscience

3. interactionist best: consciousness suggests that subjective experience is dictated by brain processes but our subjective experience of red comes from neurons firing: this is the explanatory gap of brain science. multilevel approach would be better here. seen in diathesis stress, e.g. MAOA and aggression needs stressor e.g. trauma in first 14 years. two explanations are not competing, and are just alternative ways to explain behaviour

Free Will Determinism AO1

is behaviour predetermined by internal/external factors or selected by choice.

3 kinds: biological, psychic, environmental are all hard determinism. (outline each)

soft determinism: we have determining factors but can reason and make conscious choices in most situations, this is a feature of cog approach.

free will: all behaviour self determined: factors exert some influence on behaviour but can be rejected if we wish to act a certain way. held by humanistic approach.

Free Will Determinism AO3

1. determinism has RWA: allows cause and effect to be found, so psychological issues can be treated by addressing cause. e.g. tumour against amygdala causes aggresion. remove tumour. this is an improvement compared to free will

2. determinism has ramification for legal system

3. free will is consistent with our experiences and has intuitive appeal. if determinism true, what is the point of living since everything chosen already. free will is the common sense explanation

4. free will is challenged by research: Libet allowed ppt to move wrist whenever they wanted to but had to announce the moment they wanted to. brain activity occured before conscious decision did. suggests free will is just illusion. brain aware of choices before our consciousness

Nature Nurture AO1

contributions of genetic/biological influences and environmental influences on behaviour. nature is nativist stance: all things come from evolution and differences are due to unique genetic code. biological factors determine us such as heredity. e.g. aggresion is heretible around 50%.

nurture: environmental assumption we are born tabula rasa. all behaviour is based on learning and environmental factors. e.g. phobias due to conditioning.

Nature Nurture AO3

1. too simplistic to use them in isolation: diathesis stress model e.g. MAOA gene only associated with aggression when first 15 years had trauma

2. debate has to be considered with context of epigenetics. tags on genes which can even be passed down through generations. e.g. during WW2, Nazi’s blocked Dutch people’s food distribution. Those who were pregnant during the famine had low birth weight babies, and they were twice as likely to develop schizophrenia when grown up compared to typical populations

3. both are determinist, which has ethical implications