psychology paper 3

Define gender bias and universality

Gender bias: treating a person in a more/ less favourable way based on their gender

Universality: where a theory is thought to apply to all people in the same way, despite, any differences between genders

Alpha bias

Misrepresentation of behaviour because researchers overestimate/ exaggerate differences between men and women

→ Freud

• women are morally inferior to men

• bc of the process of identification: argued girls do not identify as strongly with their mothers as boys identify with their fathers

• girls identify passively whereas boys identify actively

• if girls identification is weaker = they will internalise weaker morals

He exaggerated the difference between men and women in terms of morality

Beta bias

Misrepresentation of behaviour because researchers underestimate/ minimise differences between men and women

→ Kohlberg: moral development

• proposed a theory of moral development: a series of stages that children go through which each stage increasing in its level of morality = the higher the stage, the more developed you are in terms of moral reasoning

• presented children with various moral dilemmas: when he tested women they were more likely to achieve stage 3 whereas men were at stage 4

• this research led to the suggestion that women’s morality might be less sophisticated than that of men

• Gilligan argued his theory was biased → pointed out that Kohlberg’s theory of moral development was based largely on a longitudinal study which used an entirely male sample + used moral dilemmas that were biased towards a male way of reasoning, argued that female morality had more of a focus on caring for others and not hurting someone else’s feelings (an ethic of care) and as a result would end up lower on Kohlberg’s stages of morality

Kohlberg minimised the differences between men and women’s morality by assuming the male responses in his research would apply to women

→ Stress response

• most biological research into the stress response is conducted with male animals

• scientists have typically justified excluding female animals from experiments on the basis that fluctuating hormones would render the results uninterpretable

• Taylor challenged this and argues the 🤺/🛫 response to stress is incomplete: based on her research she proposed an alternative response known as the ‘tend-and-befriend’ response in women

Based on male animals and then thought to be universal - minimises differences in the stress response between men & women, failing to consider a ‘tend and befriend’ response

Androcentrism

Having a male-centred view of the world → male behaviour is judged to be the norm, more acceptable and desirable

This is a problem because it can create misleading assumptions about female behaviour and potentially have negative implications for females

→ thousands of autistic girls and women ‘going undiagnosed’ due to gender bias

• this is because autism was thought to predominantly effect boys/ men at a ratio of 10 to every one women

• bc of this, studies often recruited male only samples

• meant that girls have been under diagnosed, particularly because they are more adept at masking their autistic traits

• this had huge negative implications for girls because the failure to diagnose autism earlier on means they receive less help and support + means that they experience many other mental health issues such as anxiety, depression and self-harm

What can be done about gender bias

Psychology needs to be reflexive = it needs to reflect on itself and make changes

a change in the publication of results (alpha bias)

→ there is a bias towards publishing positive results = results that find gender differences are more likely to get published, this exaggerates differences

improve sampling (beta bias)

→ not simply have all male samples in studies, like Milgram, Asch, Zimbardo and ensure women are included

not generalise findings (beta bias)

→ not to generalise findings from research with male participants to females OR to not generalise findings from research with female participants to males

Cultural bias

Cultural bias: he tendency to interpret & judge behaviour in terms of the values and beliefs of your own society & culture → sometimes leads people to form views about the behaviour of others without any actual experience with them

Universality: the belief that some behaviours are the same for all cultures

Ethnocentrism: viewing your own culture as the standard by which other cultures are judged, involves the tendency to judge your own culture as superior to others

Cultural relativism: the idea that a behaviour can only be properly understood in the context of the norms & values of the society in which it occurs → the rejection of behaviours being universal

Examples of cultural bias

Henrich et al (2010) (ethnocentrism)

→ he argued that the majority of claims about human psychology and behaviour are based on research that studies participants who are what they call W.E.I.R.D (western, educated, industrialised, rich, democratic)

• they reported from their analysis of published psychology studies that 68% of the participants in those studies came from the USA and 96% of participants were from western industrialised nations such as North America, Europe and Australia

• therefore it could be argued that applying the findings from research universally to all cultures is biased because it is based on research using WEIRD samples → could lead to the behaviour of people from non-westernised, less eduecated, agricultural and poorer cultures being seen as abnormal

Strange situation (ethnocentrism)

→ how attached the child was to the mother was based on ho child responded to their mother leaving the room and a stranger entering, according to Ainsowrth secure attachment is characterised by moderate stranger and separation anxiety

• however this assumption of attachment is based on one culture

• as a result when the strange situation as a measure of attachment is used to study attachment in different cultures it can potentially lead to bias eg Takahashi (1990) → the SS as a measure of attachment does not reflect their child rearing practices

• ethnocentrism bc they are imposing their own cultural standard and norms on other cultures

Definitions of abnormality

• deviation from social norms: the problem with this definition is that behaviours that are abnormal from the expected standards of society in one culture may be considered normal in another culture

• for example: one of the symptoms of schizophrenia is hallucinations, research by Fernando (1998) found that people from Afro-Caribbean heritage who were now living in the UK were 7 times more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia → this is because in these cultures spiritual practices indlucing hearing voices are part of their culture, and typical behaviours rather than abnormal

• therefore by applying the definition universally across cultures psychologists can end up being culturally bias and potentially misdiagnosing people as mentally ill

What can be done about the cultural bias examples

Henrich - be more culturally relative

→ only apply the results of their research to the culture of the participants studied

→ OR ensure that cross-cultural research is conducted where different samples are studied, particularly with non-WEIRD participants

SS - be more culturally relative

→ when measuring attachment psychologists should take into account cultural norms and standards of the mother and their children

Definitions of abnormality - be more culturally relative

→ carefully consider how mental health issues may vary between cultures rather than applying a universal approach to all mental health conditions across all cultures

Example of universal behaviour

Dr. Paul Ekman

→ established that basic facial expressions for emotions are universal

• he studied western and eastern cultures including a people group in New Guinea who were living in an isolated, preliterate culture who had never seen any outsiders

• His findings concluded that there are universal facial expressions of emotion

Define ethical implications and socially sensitive research

Ethical implications: the impact/ consequences that can come from the findings of psychological research, and this goes beyond the participants of the study

Socially sensitive research: studies in which there are potential social consequences or implications, either directly to the participants in research or the class of individuals represented by the research

Ethical implications and socially sensitive sensitivity in attachment

Bowlby

• his theory of maternal deprivation stated the early separation of a child from their primary caregiver during a critical period can have irreversible damaging consequences for the development of the child

→ it could lead to those children raised in daycare rather than a stay-at-home mother to be negatively stereotyped

→ those children that were separated during the critical period would feel that there is nothing they can do about their anxiety and struggles in relationships as adults

→ it could lead to mothers who send their children to daycare to be looked down upon and criticised, adds a burden of responsibility on mothers to form a strong relationship with their child and set them up to take the blame for any negative behaviours and delayed development in the child’s life

Ethical implications and socially sensitive sensitivity in autism

Baron-Cohen

Looked at the link between levels of testosterone in the amniotic fluid of pregnant women and autistic traits (Found a positive correlation)

This research could lead to changes in public policy that affects individuals and/or groups

Baron-Cohen had to write a response piece in the guardian in which he had to clarify the purpose of the research and what it did not mean

Shows how psychological research needs to be careful in considering the ethical implications of the research and how it may be interpreted and applied in the media

Ethical implications and socially sensitive sensitivity in intelligence testing

In 1904 Binet created the first measurement of intelligence

→ the purpose of this was to identify children with developmental disabilities so that they could receive extra help in school

• however some people used the intelligence test for different purposes

• Yerkes created the army alpha test and army beta test during WWI: these tests were biased in favour of those from American culture

• 1.75 million army recruits completed the tests: white Americans, black Americans and European immigrants

• findings: white Americans had a mental age of 13yrs, black Americans had a mental age of 10.41yrs

→ after WWI this data was taken and used as justification to demonstrate the superiority of white race + to prevent those classified as ‘feeble-minded’ from reproducing

→ in America (1920s) a number of US states passed laws that led to the sterilisation of many people on the basis that they were ‘feeble-minded’ and unfit to reproduce → to improve the genetic makeup of populations

How can psychologists deal with socially sensitive research

1. Care needs to be taken with how psychologists formulate their research question so that it doesn’t misrepresent certain groups (IQ testing)

2. Be alert to the possibility of the misuse of findings & take steps to present findings in a value-free way

3. Take steps to avoid sensational media presentation of findings (autism)

4. Weigh up the possible costs and benefits before conducting any research, and only proceed where the benefits (to many people) outweigh the costs (to a few)

Holism AO1

Holism: the idea that human behaviour should be understood not as separate parts but as an integrated whole

→ Gestalt psychologists: group of German researchers working in the 1920s/30s, “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”

→ strongly seen in the humanistic approach:

• Maslow was interested in human motivation and his hierarchy of needs does not focus on on part of motivation but rather multiple factors including the environment and relationships with others and emotions

• When Rogers was helping people people through client-centred therapy he saw successful therapy as bringing together all aspects of the whole person (childhood, environment, stress)

• Believed in the richness of human experience → to understand a person they focused on all parts of a person’s life, to be reductionist is to dehumanise a person

Reductionism AO1

Explaining complex behaviours by breaking them down to their smallest, most basic parts

→ based on the idea that the simplest level of explanation is the best

Biological reductionism

• Explains behaviour at the level of genes & brain chemicals

• Eg it takes a complex behaviour like OCD and breaks it down into the role of specific neurotransmitters such as having lower levels of serotonin

Environmental reductionism

• Explains behaviour at the level of the environment

• Suggests that all behaviour can be explained by stimulus and response

• Eg phobias would be the result of classical conditioning: the association of a neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus, and would be maintained by negative reinforcement

Holism VS Reductionism: levels of explanation

Reductionism can be viewed as a hierarchy moving from the lowest most biological level through to a broader middle psychological level and then to a wider sociological level

OCD

3⃣ (social/ cultural) → how OCD is affecting their social relationships

2⃣ (psychological) → the obsessive irrational thoughts they are experiencing and how that makes them feel

1⃣ (biological) → the level of serotonin in the brain

Holism VS Reductionism AO3 SPL

Reductionism

✅ Scientific

→ to be reductionist is to be scientific

→ this is because the scientific process involves clearly defined variables, breaking behaviour down into an independent and dependant variable

→ this allows cause + effect to be established and the control of variables can only be achieved through the reductionist approach

→ also fit with the scientific method in terms of being objective: eg skinner box → was able to objectively count how many times the rat pressed the lever

→ whereas the holistic view prefers case studies + diaries ,which whilst producing richer, more detailed information, lack objectivity & the ability to control variables to establish cause & effect

→ therefore of psychology adapts a reductionist view, it helps psychology gain scientific credibility

✅ Practical applications

→ for example breaking OCD down to the low biological level of neurotransmitter imbalances had led to the creation of drug treatments

→ SSRIs are a type of drug that specifically increase levels of serotonin in the brain which some researchers found to help reduce OCD symptoms

→ its only through this focused reductionist approach where specific individual parts have been researched in depth that benefits such as these drug treatments are developed

❌ Leads to a loss of meaning

→ however some have argued against a reductionist view

→ this is because adopting a reductionist view lead to a loss of meaning

→ OCD: if lower biological levels are considered on their own, other reasons involved in the behaviour may be overlooked

→ eg very often SSRIs are given to people with OCD however this may miss the causes of a child OCD such as past trauma

→ a reductionist view ignores the complex interaction of many factors which can be seen in the diathesis-stress model as an explanation of OCD which considers how biological and environmental factors interact and affect one another

→ therefore, it could be argued that simply focusing on lower level reductionist explanations fails to fully consider the complexity of human behaviour as some behaviours can really only be investigated in the holistic context in which they occur

Nature VS Nurture AO1

Most psychologists agree that we are influenced by both our genes and our experience: nature and nurture are both involved and so the nature and nurture is actually about how they interact with each other (interactionist approach)

Nature

→ abilities are innate, or inborn

→ heredity is more influential

Nurture

→ environment and experience are more influential

→ view the mind as ‘tabula rasa’ or a blank slate on which experiences are to be written

Approaches in psychology

• Behaviourism and the SLT would be nurture

• Biological would be mainly nature

• Cognitive, psychodynamic and humanism contain elements of nature and nurture

Brain Plasticity

→ the idea that the brain can change and reorganise its structure (nature) as a result of experiences in life (nurture)

Maguire et al (2000)

→ conducted research on the brains of London taxi drivers

→ they scanned the brain of each participant using an MRI machine which provided an image of the structure of their brain

→ found that London taxi drivers showed a larger posterior hippocampus compared to non taxi drivers/ taxi drivers experience of navigating the streets of London (nurture) placed such a high demand on their spatial processing that the brain changed its structure (nature)

→ this shows the interaction between nature and nurture and their relative contribution of both

OCD

→ evidence in the role of genetics in OCD comes from twin study research

→ research by Nestadt et al (2010) showed that of all the twin study research published to date that the CR in MZ twins (68%) was higher than in DZ twins (31%)

→ demonstrates the potential influence that nature has on OCD

→ this research also indicates that its not just nature, if OCD was purely genetic we would expect the CR rates for MZs to be 100% and 50% for DZs

→ this suggests that there must be something else involved in OCD and many have pointed to the influence of environmental factors (nurture)

→ another explanation for OCD is the diathesis-stress model: this model proposes an explanation of how biological and environmental factors may be interconnected: this suggests that genetics may be involved in that they create a predisposition/ vulnerability for OCD but OCD may never develop unless there is an environmental trigger/ stressor, this model suggests that environmental factors can trigger/ increase the risk of developing OCD

→ Cromer et al. (2007) found that over 50% of the OCD patients in their sample had a traumatic event in their past

→ this suggests that nature alone is not sufficient to fully explain OCD and that the diathesis stress model offers an explanation for how nature AND nurture may be both involved

Constructivism

→ the idea that people shape and select environments well suited to their ‘natures’

→ NICHE PICKING: where people voluntarily choose an environment based on their genetics, they create & shape environments that are best suited to them (Scarr and McCartney) = so one is interacting with the other and they cannot be separated

Self disclosure AO1

Self-disclosure: revealing personal information about ourselves

→ we tend to disclose more information to those we like

→ like people who reveal information about themselves to us

→ thought to be an indication of trust

Social penetration theory: Altman and Taylor

→ suggest that the relationship between individuals develops as the breadth and depth of interpersonal communication increases from shallow levels to become more intimate

• breadth: the type of topics that can be discussed

• depth: level of information about a topic that is revealed

Reciprocity: relationships will only develop if both individuals are active in both disclosing information and responding in an appropriate way

Attributions: individuals consider the motivations behind self-disclosure, someone who is seen as disclosing to anyone, is seen as less attractive than someone who disclosed to us because they see us as special

Appropriateness: breaking social norms or revealing information too early can have the opposite reaction, lowering attraction

Self-disclosure AO3

SRC (all is self disclosure)

✅ Supporting evidence

• Spreecher and Hendrick (2004): used a longitudinal observational study watching couples self disclosure on dates

• Men and women were found to have similar levels of self disclosure

• A positive correlation was found between the amount of self disclosure and measures of the quality of the relationship (satisfaction, love and commitment)

• This suggests self disclosure is reciprocal with both partners needing to reveal information about themselves + higher levels of self disclosure are linked to the level of attractiveness felt towards a romantic partner

• This increases the validity of the theory and increases its explanatory power

❌ Research methods

• Spreecher and Hendrick (2004) and other research on self-disclosure is correlational

• There may not be a causal link, rather than self-disclosure causing attraction, we may self-disclose more to people we are attracted to

• Or perhaps there is a third factor: if we share interests with people this may lead to both increased disclosure and increased attraction

• This lack of scientific credibility and lack of control over variables limits its external validity

❌ Cultural bias

• Increased self-disclosure could be culturally bias and a reflection of individualistic western ideas

• Findings by Tang (2013) suggest that people in the collectivist society of China have higher relationship satisfaction with lower levels of disclosure

• This limits the generalisability of this theory and suggests that a more culturally relative explanation is needed

Social exchange theory AO1

Thibault and Kelley (1959):

→ suggest an economic theory of romantic relationships

→ similar to how a business completes a cost/benefit analysis

→ each romantic partner will want to maximise rewards/ profits and minimise costs/losses in starting or maintaining a relationship (min-max principle

Rewards and costs:

→ both partners looking for mutually beneficial arrangements results in stable and successful relationships

→ rewards: self-esteem, entertainment, gaining financial security, friendship, sex (SET suggests we are more attracted to these people)

→ costs: giving up time, emotional instability, opportunity cost (SET suggests that we are less attracted to these people)

→ some rewards and costs may be viewed as more or less important by different people

Comparison level:

→ the estimation of how rewarding a relationship should be

→ to decide this we compare our current relationship to previous relationships, other peoples relationships or those we see in the media

→ linked to feelings of self worth + changes over time

Comparison with alternatives:

→ people look at other potential partners and consider if they would be a higher profit, if higher profit can be found with an alternative the original relationship will end

Stages of a relationship: small birds come in

→ sampling: thinking about the costs and benefits of entering into a relationship with someone

→ bargaining: the relationship is tested out and the partners negotiate costs and benefits to see if the relationship is worth pursuing further

→ commitment: the relationship is established and the costs and benefits are predictable

→ institutionalisation: the couple are settled and stable because the norms of the relationship are established

Social exchange theory AO3

✅ Research support

→ Kurdeck (1995) interviewed homo- and heterosexual couples

→ committed partners perceived they had more rewards and fewer costs and also viewed alternatives as unattractive

→ the findings confirmed predictions of SET, supporting the validity of the theory in gay and lesbian as well as heterosexual couples

✅ Practical applications of SET

→ understanding what makes partners satisfied in relationships can be used to inform relationship or marriage counselling

→ therapists can use the ideas from SET to help couples identify the costs and rewards within their relationship

→ couples can work together to minimise costs and maximise rewards for each person in the relationship, in order to increase relationship satisfaction

→ the theory therefore has real work value

❌ SET fails to explain all relationships

→ SET claims that we end relationships when costs outweigh rewards or alternatives seem more attractive, however this is clearly not always the case

→ people in abusive relationships would have high costs and very little rewards

→ SET therefore fails to explain why many people remain in dangerous abusive relationships

❌ Reductionist

→ SET oversimplifies the complex behaviour of romantic attraction and relationship satisfaction to the rational exchange of basic rewards and costs

→ however real relationships are emotional and irrational

→ this ignores many other factors which may influence relationships, such as emotions, attachment style and cultural issues

The equity theory AO1

A development of the SET

Has all of the same assumptions, however Hatfield (1979) suggests this is missing the factor of equality

Equality:

→ people are more satisfied in a relationship if they feel the balance of rewards and costs between partners is similar or they are getting what they deserve

→ balance: both partners profits minus loss should be the same even if they are different profits and losses

Over-benefits:

→ if one partner gets more overall profit they will feel personal shame and pity towards the other partner and may feel guilty

Under-benefits:

→ if one partner gets more overall costs they will feel resentful and ultimately will become angry towards the other partner

Changes in perspective:

→ overtime what is considered unfair may change, early in relationships attraction could be seen as more important than equity

→ however Hatfield (2011) suggests that in the later stages of relationships, successful couples are likely to “keep score”

The equity theory AO3

✅ Supporting research:

→ Utne et al (1984): used a self-report method on newly married couples who had been together for at least 2 years

→ recorded their perceived level of equity and measure of their relationship stability and distress

→ found that partners who felt they were treated with more equity thought the relationship was more stable and were happier in it

→ this suggests that as predicted by the equity theory feelings of equality are important in the stability of relationships

✅ Practical applications:

→ understanding what makes partners satisfied in relationships can be used to inform relationship or marriage counselling

→ therapists can use the ideas from Equity theory to help couples identify and negotiate the costs and rewards within their relationship

→ couples can work together to ensure that there is a balance between rewards and costs for both partners in the relationship, in order to increase relationship satisfaction

→ this theory therefore has real world value

❌ Research methods:

→ research is correlational

→ rather than a lack of equity resulting in dissatisfaction in a relationship, it may be that dissatisfaction results in a partner perceiving that their relationship is unequal

→ this lack of scientific credibility and control over variables limits the explanatory power of this explanation

❌ Reductionist:

→ as an economic theory, equity theory oversimplifies the complex behaviour of romantic attraction and relationship satisfaction to exchange of basic rewards and costs

→ however, real relationships are emotional and irrational

→ this ignores many other factors which may influence relationships such as emotions, attachment style, cultural expectations etc**

Rusbults (2011) investment model AO1

A development of the SET

→ romantic partners will remain in a relationship if there is high commitment (dedicated to work on and maintain a relationship)

→ how committed a partner is depends on 3 factors: satisfaction, alternatives, investment

Investment: anything we would lose if the relationship were to end

→ intrinsic: things we put directly into the relationship (money, effort, emotion)

→ extrinsic: resources arising as a result of the relationship (house, children, mutual friends

Rusbults investment model AO3

✅ Research support:

→ Le and Agnew (2003) conducted a meta-analysis involving 52 studies and over 11,000 participants

→ they found that satisfaction, comparison with alternaitves and investment all predicted how committed partners were to their relationship

→ this was true for both men and women, across cultures, and for homosexual and heterosexual relationships

✅ Model can explain why people stay in abusive relationships

→ Rusbult and Martz (1995) studied abused women staying at a shelter

→ those reporting the largest investment were the most likely to return to abuse partners

→ therefore, Rusbult’s investment model is more successful than SET, as it can explain why abused partners remain in dangerous relationships despite costs outweighing rewards

❌ Oversimplifies investment:

→ Goodfriend and Agnew (2008) argue that there is more to investment than just the resources you have already put into a relationship

→ early in a relationship partners make very few actual investments, but they do invest in future plans

→ this means the original model fails to consider the complexity of investment

Parasocial relationships AO1

One-sided relationship: one person invests a lot of energy and time, although the other person is completely unaware of their existence

→ Giles and Maltby (2006) identified three levels of celebrity worship, using the Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS)

1. Entertainment social: celebrities are viewed as sources of entertainment and encourage gossip and social bonding

2. Intense personal: taking an interest in the celebrities personal life such as their dress sense or food they like, this may also include frequent thoughts and daydreams about the celebrity

3. Borderline-pathological: fantasies are uncontrollable and behaviour is extreme or illegal, an individual may spend large sums of money to obtain memorabilia and may engage in illegal activities such as stalking, also usual for people to believe that if only they were given a chance to meet their favourite celebrity in person, their feelings would be reciprocated

The absorption addiction model

McCutchen (2002)

→ people engage in parasocial relationships to compensate for deficiencies in their life such as low self esteem or poor mental health

→ forming parasocial relationships with a celebrity allows them to achieve the fulfilment they lack in everyday life and gives them purpose and excitement

Absorption = individual becomes consumed with the life of the celebrity

Addiction = individual increases their involvement to feel the same satisfaction over time

Attachment theory of parasocial relationships

→ Bowlby suggests that people who had poor relationship with their primary caregiver in childhood will have difficulties forming future relationships

→ insecure-resistant types are most likely to form parasocial relationships as parasocial relationships meet their need for affection, but without the fear of rejection

Parasocial relationships AO3

✅ Supporting evidence (absorption addiction model)

→ Maltby (2003) linked types of personality to levels of parasocial relationships

→ neurotics were most likely to be at the intense-personal level

→ psychotics were most likely to be at the borderline-pathological level

→ this supports the idea from the absorption addiction model that people engage in parasocial relationships to compensate for deficiencies in their life, such as poor mental health

✅ Supporting evidence for the attachment theory explanation

→ Kienlen et al (1997) investigated the experiences of stalkers and found that 63% f their participants experienced a loss of a caregiver in childhood while 50% experienced emotional and physical abuse

→ this supports the idea that poor attachment in childhood may lead to the development of parasocial relationships

❌ View of parasocial relationships as unhealthy

→ both the absorption addiction model and the attachment explanation see parasocial relationships as unhealthy due to dysfunction

→ however some researchers argue that parasocial relationships can be positive and are not just about making up for deficiencies or fulfilling attachment

→ these relationships may allow individuals to safely explore emotions and can serve as community building tools