Issues and Debates

Universality

Psychologists possess beliefs and values influenced by the social and historical context within which they live. This may undermine psychologists’ claims to discover facts about human behaviour that are objective, value-free and consistent across time and culture.

Bias

Bias is a leaning towards a personal view that doesn’t reflect reality. Psychological theory and research may not accurately represent the experience and behaviour of men and woman = gender bias.

Alpha bias

Differences between the sexes are usually presented as fixed and inevitable.

These differences occasionally heighten the value of women but are more likely to devalue women in relation to men.

Example of alpha bias

Alpha bias favouring men - Freud (1905) claimed children in the phallic stage, desire their opposite-sex parent. This is resolved by identification with their same-sex parent. But a girl’s identification is weaker, creating a weaker Superego and weaker moral development.

Alpha bias favouring women - Chodorow (1968) said that daughters and mothers are more connected than sons and others because of biological similarities - so women develop better bonds and empathy for others.

Beta bias

Ignoring or underestimating differences between men and women often occurs when female participants are not included in the research process but it is assumed that research findings apply equally to both sexes.

Examples of beta bias

Early research into fight or flight was based on male animals (because female hormones fluctuate). Fight or flight was assumed to be a universal response to threat.

Taylor et al. (2000) suggest that women exhibit a tend and befriend response governed by the hormone oxytocin which is more plentiful in women (but also present in small quantities in men) and reduces the fight or flight response. It is an evolved response for caring for young.

Andocentrism

Alpha and beta bias are consequences of androcentrism, Psychology has traditionally been a subject dominated by men - list of 100 famous psychologists contained 6 women.

This leads to female behaviour being misunderstood and even pathologised (taken as a sign of illness).

For example, feminists object to the category of premenstrual syndrome (PMS) because it medicalises female terms. But male anger is often seen as a rational response response to external pressures (Brescoll and Uhlmann 2008).

AO3 of gender bias (gender differences)

Limitation of gender bias - Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) concluded that girls have better verbal ability and boys better spatial ability - due to hardwired biological brain differences.

Joel et al. (2015) used brain scanning and found no such gender differences.

This suggests that we should be wary of accepting research as biological facts when it might be explained better as social stereotypes.

Counterpoint to gender bias (gender differences)

Ingalhalikar et al. (2014) suggests the popular social stereotype that women are better at multitasking may have some biological truth to it - their hemispheres are better connected.

This suggests that there may be biological differences but we still should be wary of exaggerating the effect they may have on behaviour.

AO3 of gender bias (sexism)

Limitation of gender bias - Women are underrepresented in university departments (Murphy et al. 2014). Research is more likely to be conducted by men which may disadvantage women.

For example, a male researcher may expect female participants to be irrational and unable to complete complex tasks (Nicolson 1995), which may mean they underperform.

This means that the institutional structures and methods of psychology may produce findings that are gender-biased.

AO3 of research challenging bias

Limitation of research challenging bias - Formanowicz et al. (2018) analysed 1000 articles relating to gender bias - such research is funded less often and published by less prestigious journals.

This still held true when gender bias was compared to ethnic bias, and when other factors were controlled (e.g. the gender of the author(s) and methodology).

This suggests that gender bias in psychological research may not be taken as seriously as other forms of bias.

Over-representation of cultures

Americans and students are over-represented in research.

A review found that 68% of research participants came from the United States, and 96% from industrialised nations (Henrich et al. 2010).

Another review found that 80% of research participants were undergraduates studying psychology (Arnett 2008)

WEIRD

WEIRD people set the standard.

What we know about human behaviour has a strong cultural bias. Henrich et al. coined the term WERID to describe the group of people most likely to be studied by psychologists - __**W**__**esternised**, __**E**__**ducated** people from __**I**__**ndustrialised**, __**R**__**ich** __**D**__**emocracies**.

If the norm or standard for particular behaviour is set by WERID people, then the behaviour of people from non-western, less educated, agricultural and poorer cultures are inevitably seen as ‘abnormal’, ‘inferior’ or ‘unusual’.

Ethnocentrism

Superiority of own culture.

A form of cultural bias.

In psychological research this may be communicated through a view that any behaviour that does not conform to a European/American standard is somehow deficient or underdeveloped.

Example of ethnocentrism

Ainsworth and Bell’s (1970) research on attachment type reflected the norms of US culture.

They suggested that ideal (secure) attachment was defined as a baby showing moderate distress when left alone by the mother figure.

This has led to misinterpretation of child-rearing practices in other countries which deviated from the US norm, e.g. Japanese babies rarely left on own, more likely to be classed as insecurely attached as they showed distress on separation (Takahashi 1986).

Cultural relativism

Helps to avoid cultural bias.

The ‘facts’ that psychologists discover may only make sense from the perspective of the culture within which they were discovered.

Being able to recognise this is one way of avoiding cultural bias in research.

Universality versus cultural relativism

Berry (1969) argues that:

* An etic approach looks at behaviour from outside a given culture and identifies behaviours that are universal.
* An emic approach functions from inside a culture and identifies behaviours that are specific to that culture.

Ainsworth and Bell’s research illustrates an imposed etic - they studied behaviours inside a single culture (America) and then assumed their ideal attachment type could be applied universally.

AO3 of cultural bias (studies)

Limitation of cultural bias - Both Asch’s and Milgram’s original studies were conducted with white middle-class US participants. Replications of these studies in different countries produced rather different results.

Asch-type experiments in collectivist cultures found significantly higher rates of conformity than the original studies in the US, an individualist culture (e.g Smith and Bond 1993).

This suggests our understanding of topic such as social influence should only be applied to individualist cultures.

Counterpoint to cultural bias (studies)

Individualism - collectivism distinction may no longer apply due to increasing global media, e.g. Takano and Osaka (1999) found that 14 of 15 studies comparing the US and Japan found no evidence of individualist versus collectivist differences.

This suggests that cultural bias in research may be less of an issue in more recent psychological research.

AO3 of cultural bias (cultural psychology)

Strength of cultural psychology - Cultural psychology is the study of how people shape and are shaped by their cultural experience (Cohen 2017). It is an emerging field that takes an emic approach.

Research is conducted from inside a culture, often alongside local researchers using culturally-based techniques. Fewer cultures are considered when comparing differences (usually just two).

This suggests that modern psychologists are mindful of the dangers of cultural bias and are taking steps to avoid it.

AO3 of cultural bias (ethnic stereotyping)

Limitation of cultural bias - Gould (1981) explained how the first intelligence tests led to eugenic social policies in America. During WW1 psychologists gave IQ tests to 1.75 million army recruits.

Many test items were ethnocentric (e.g. name US presidents) so recruits from south-eastern Europe and African-Americans scored lowest and were deemed genetically inferior.

This illustrates how cultural bias can be used to justify prejudice and discrimination towards ethnic and cultural groups.

The freewill v determinism debate

Is our behaviour a matter of freewill or are we the product of internal and/or external influences?

Most approaches in psychology are determinist but disagree on the causes of human behaviour.

Free will

The notion of free will suggests humans are free to make choices.

There are biological and environmental influences on our behaviour - but free will implies we can reject them.

This is the view of the humanistic approach.

Hard determinism

Fatalism - It suggests that all human action has a cause, and it should be possible to identify these causes.

Soft determinism

It suggests that all human action has a cause but people have freedom to make choices within a restricted range of options.

Biological determinism

The biological approach describes many causes of behaviour, e.g. the influence of the autonomic nervous system on stress or the influences of genes on mental health.

Modern biological psychologists would recognise the mediating influences of the environment on our biological structures (another determinist influence).

Environmental determinism

Skinner described free will as ‘an illusion’ and all behaviour as the result of conditioning.

Our experience of ‘choice’ is the sum total of reinforcement contingencies that have acted upon us throughout our lives.

Psychic determinism

Freud emphasises the influence of biological drives and unconscious conflicts repressed in childhood.

Even something as seemingly random as a ‘slip of the tongue’ can be explained by the unconscious.

Causal explanations

Science seeks to find causal explanations where one thing is determined by another.

A basic principle of science is that every event has a cause and these can be explained with general laws. Knowledge of these allow scientists to predict and control events.

In psychology, the laboratory experiment allows researchers to simulate the conditions of the test tube and remove all other extraneous variables to demonstrate a causal effect.

AO3 of free will (practical)

Strength of free will - Roberts et al. (2000) looked at adolescents who had a strong belief in fatalism - that their lives were ‘decided’ by events outside of their control.

They were at greater risk of developing depression. People who exhibit an internal, rather than external, locus of control are more likely to be optimistic.

This suggests that, even if we do no have free will, the fact that we believe we do may have a positive impact on mind and behaviour.

AO3 of free will (evidence)

Limitation of free will - Libet et al. (1983) asked participants to randomly flick their wrist and say when they felt the will to move. Brain activity was also measured.

The unconscious brain activity leading up to the conscious decision to move came half a second before the participant’s conscious decision to move.

This may be interpreted as meaning that even out most basic experiences of free will are actually determined by our brain before we are aware of them.

Counterpoint to free will (evidence)

The fact that people consciously become aware of decisions milliseconds after they have begun to enact the decision still means they may have made the decision to act. Our consciousness of the decision is a ‘read-out’ of our sometimes unconscious decision-making.

This suggests this evidence is not appropriate as a challenge to free will.

AO3 of determinism

Limitation of determinism - The hard determinist stance is not consistent with the way in which our legal system operates. In court, offenders are held responsible for their actions.

Indeed, the main principle of our legal system is that the defendant exercises their free will in committing the crime.

This suggests that, in the real world, determinist arguments do no work.

Interactionist approach

It is not really a debate because all characteristics combine nature and nurture (even eye colour is only .80 heritable).

For example, attachment can be explained in terms of quality of parental love (Bowlby 1958) or child’s temperament (Kagan 1984). Environment and heredity interact.

Diathesis-stress model

In the diathesis-stress model behaviour is caused by a biological/environmental vulnerability (diathesis) which is only expressed when coupled with a biological/environmental trigger (stressor).

For example, a person who inherits a genetic vulnerability for OCD may not develop the disorder. But, combined with a psychological trigger (e.g. a traumatic experience) this may result in the disorder appearing.

Epigenetics

Epigenetics is a change in genetic activity without changing the genetic code.

Lifestyle and events we encounter (e.g. smoking, diet, trauma, war) leave ‘marks on our DNA (genes) - switching genes on or off.

This has a lifelong influence and can be passed on to future generations.

Nature

Inherited influences.

Early nativists (e.g. Descartes, 17th century) argued that human characteristics are innate - the result of our genes.

Psychological characteristics (e.g. intelligence of personality) are determined by biological factors, just like eye colour or height.

Nurture

Environmental influences.

Empiricists (e.g. Locke, 17th century) argued that the mind is a blank slate at birth, and is shaped by interaction with the environment e.g. the behaviourist approach.

Lerner (1986) identified different levels of the environment:

* Prenatal terms, e.g. mother smoking of hearing music
* Postnatal experiences, e.g. the social conditions a child grows up in.

Measuring nature and nurture: Concordance

The degree to which two people are similar on a particular trait.

Measuring nature and nurture: Heritability

Proportion of differences between individuals in a population, with regards to a particular trait, due to genes. 0.01 (1%) is very little contribution, 1.0 (100%) means genes are the only reason.

The figure for heritability in IQ is about 0.5 (Plomin 1994)

AO3 of nature-nurture (adoption studies)

Strength of nature-nurture - If adopted children are more similar to their adoptive parents, suggests environmental influence, if more similar to biological parents, suggests genetic influence.

Rhee and Waldman (2002) found in a meta-analysis of adoption studies that genetic influences accounted for 41% of variance in aggression.

This shows how research can separate nature and nurture influences.

Counterpoint of nature-nurture (studies)

Children create their own nurture by selecting environments appropriate to their nature - a naturally aggressive child will choose aggressive friends and become more aggressive (niche-picking, Plomin).

This suggests that it does not make sense to look at evidence of either nature or nurture.

AO3 of nature-nurture debate (epigenetics)

Strength of the nature-nurture debate - In 1944, the Nazis blocked the distribution of food to the Dutch people and 22,000 died of starvation (the Dutch Hunger Winter).

Susser and Lin (1992) found that women who became pregnant during the famine had low birth weight babies who were twice as likely to develop schizophrenia.

This suggests that the life experiences of previous generations can leave epigenetic ‘markers’ that influence the health of their offspring.

AO3 of nature-nurture debate (application)

Strength of nature-nurture debate - Nestadt et al. (2010) put the heritability rate at .76 for OCD i.e. it is highly heritable. Such understanding can inform genetic counselling.

People who have a high genetic risk of OCD because of their family background can receive education about inheritance, management and prevention of the disorder.

This shows that the debate is not just theoretical but that it is also important, at a practical level, to understand the interaction between nature and nurture.

The holism-reductionism debate

Debate over which position is preferable for psychology - study the whole person (holism) or study component parts (reductionism).

As soon as you break down the ‘whole; it isn’t holistic. Reductionism can be broken down into levels of explanation.

Holism

Holism proposes that it only makes sense to study a whole system - the whole is greater than the sum of its parts (Gestalt psychology).

For example humanistic psychology focuses on experience which can’t be reduced to biological units, qualitative methods investigate themes.

Reductionism

Reductionism is based off the scientific principle of parisimony - that all phenomena should be explained using the simplest (lowest level) principles.

Level of explanation

For example, OCD may be understood in different ways:

* Socio-cultural level - behaviour most people would regard as odd (e.g. repetitive handwashing).
* Psychological level - the individual’s experience of having obsessive thoughts.
* Physical level - the sequence of movements involved in washing one’s hands.
* Environmental.behavioural level - learning experiences (conditioning)
* Physiological level - abnormal functioning in the frontal lobes.
* Neurochemical level - underproduction of serotonin

Can argue about which is the ‘best explanation of OCD, but each level is more reductionist thn the one before.

Biological reductionism

Suggests all behaviour can be explained through neurochemical, physiological evolutionary and/or genetic influences.

For example, drugs that increase serotonin are used to treat OCD. Therefore low serotonin may be a cause of OCD, We have reduced OCD to the level of neurotransmitter activity.

Environmental reductionism

Proposes that all behaviour is acquired through interactions with the environment, e.g the behaviourist approach (stimulus-response links).

For example, the learning theory of attachment reduces the idea of love (between baby and mother) to a learned association between the mother (neural stimulus) and food (unconditioned stimulus) resulting in pleasure (conditioned response).

AO3 of holism (practical value)

Limitation of holism - Holistic accounts of human behaviour become hard to use as they become more complex which presents researchers with a practical dilemma.

If many different factors contribute to say, depression, then it becomes difficult to know which is most influential and which to prioritise for treatment.

This suggests that holistic accounts may lack practical value (whereas reductionist account may be better).

AO3 of reductionism (scientific)

Strength of reductionism - In order to conduct well-controlled research variables need to operationalised - target behaviours broken down into constituent parts.

This makes it possible to conduct experiments or record observations (behavioural categories) in a way that is objective and reliable.

This scientific approach gives psychology greater credibility, placing it on equal terms with the natural sciences.

Counterpoint to reductionism having scientific status

Reductionist explanations at the level of the gene or neurotransmitter do not include an analysis of the context within which behaviour occurs and therefore lack meaning.

This suggests that reductionist explanations can only ever form part of an explanation.

AO3 of reductionism (explanations)

Limitation of reductionism - There are aspects of social behaviour that only emerge within a group context and cannot be understood in terms of the individual group members.

For example, the Stanford prison study could not be understood by observing the participants as individuals, it was the behaviour of the group that was important.

This shows that, for some behaviours, higher (or even holistic) level explanations provide a more valid account.

The idiographic-nomothetic debate

Debate over which position is preferable for psychology:

* Detailed study of one individual or one group to provide in-depth understanding (idiographic), or
* Study of larger groups with the aim of discovering norms, universal principles or ‘laws’ of behaviour (nomothetic).

The two approaches may both have a place within a scientific study of the person.

Idiographic approach

The number of participants is small, often a single individual/group. Research might include others e.g. family, friends.

The initial focus is about understanding the individual, but generalisations may be made based on findings.

Qualitative research e.g. individual with depression might be interviewed, emergent themes identified and conclusions formed. This might help inform mental health professionals determine best practice.

Examples of idiographic appraoch in psychology

Rogers’ concept of counselling was based on his work as a therapist. HIs ‘theory’ on the role of unconditional positive regard in self-development was based on his in-depth study of his clients.

Freud’s explanation of phobia was based on the detailed case study of Little Hans over many years.

Nomothetic approach

General principles of behaviour (laws are developed which are then applied in individual situations, such as in therapy.

Quantitative research - hypotheses are formulated, samples of people (or animals) are gathered and data analysed for its statistical significance. Nomothetic approaches seek to quantify (count) human behaviour.

Examples of the nomothetic approach in psychology

Skinner studied animals to develop the general laws of learning.

Sperry’s split-brain research involved repeated testing and was, in part, the basis for understanding hemispheric lateralisation.

Objective versus subjective in the idiographic-nomothetic debate

The nomothetic approach seeks standardised methods of assessing people. This ensures true replication occurs across samples of behaviour and removes the contaminating influence of bias.

\
The idiographic approach tends not to believe that objectivity is possible in psychological research. It is people’s individual experience of their unique context that is important.

AO3 of the idiographic and nomothetic approach (work together)

Strength of the idiographic and nomothetic approach - The idiographic approach uses in-depth qualitative methods which complements the nomothetic approach by providing detail.

In-depth case studies such as HM (damaged memory) may reveal insights about normal functioning which contribute to our overall understanding.

This suggests that even though the focus is on fewer individuals, the idiographic approach may help form ‘scientific’ laws of behaviour.

Counterpoint to the idiographic and nomothetic approach working together

Idiographic approach on own is restricted, no baseline for comparison, also unscientific and subjective.

This suggests that it is difficult to build effective general theories of human behaviour in the complete absence of nomothetic research.

AO3 of the idiographic and nomothetic approach (aims of science)

Strength of the idiographic and nomothetic approach - Nomothetic research (like natural sciences) seeks objectivity through standardisation, control and statistical testing.

Idiographic research also seeks objectivity through triangulation (comparing a range of studies), and reflexivity (researchers examine own biases).

This suggests that both the nomothetic and idiographic approaches raise psychology’s status as a science.

AO3 of the nomothetic approach

Limitation of the nomothetic approach - Nomothetic approach focuses on general laws and may ‘lose the whole person’ within psychology.

For example, knowing about a 1% lifetime risk of schizophrenia says little about having the disorder - which might be useful for therapeutic ideas.

This means, in its search for generalities, the nomothetic approach may sometimes fail to relate to ‘experience’.

Ethical issues

Ethical issues arise because of conflict between the need for valid research findings and preserving the rights of participants.

Ethical guidelines protect participants and guide researchers.

Guidelines are also related to the ethical implications (consequences) of research.

Socially Sensitive research (SSR)

Psychologists must be aware of the consequences of research for the research participants or for the group of people represented by the research.

Som research is more socially sensitive (e.g. studying depression) but even seemingly innocuous research (e.g. long-term memory in a student population) may have consequences (e.g. for exam policy).

Implications for the research process

Consequences should be considered at all stages of the research process.

Research question

The phrasing of the research question influences how the findings are interpreted.

For example, if a research study is looking at ‘alternative relationships’ this is likely to focus on homosexual relationships and may overlook heterosexual relationships because ‘alternative’ suggests alternative to ‘heterosexual relationships’ (Kitzinger and Coyle 1995)

Dealing with participants

For example, informed consent, confidentiality and psychological harm

For example, when interviewing victims of domestic abuse, participants may worry about an ex-partner finding out what they said and also participants may find the experience of talking about abusive experiences stressful.

The way findings are used

Need to consider in advance how findings might be used, especially because findings may give scientific credence to prejudices. For example, the use of early (flawed) IQ tests in America during World War 1 led to prejudice against Eastern Europeans and lower immigration quota.

The media may be especially interested in sensitive findings, e.g. research on patients in a minimally conscious state who appeared to be responsive (Cyranoski 2012).

AO3 of SSR (groups)

Strength of SSR - The DSM-1 listed homosexuality as a ‘sociopathic personality disorder’ but finally removed it in 1973, as a result of the Kinsey report (Kinsey et al. 1948).

Anonymous interviews with over 5000 men about their sexual behaviour concluded that homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexual behaviour.

This illustrates the importance of researchers tackling topics that are sensitive.

Counterpoint of SSR having benefits

However there may be negative consequences that could have been anticipated, e.g. research on the ‘criminal gene’. Implies that people can’t be held responsible for their wrongdoing.

This suggests that, when researching socially sensitive topics, there is a need for very careful consideration of the possible outcomes and their consequences.

AO3 of SSR (policymakers)

Strength of SSR - Government needs research when developing social policy related to child care, education, mental health provision, crime etc. Better to base such policies on scientific research rather than politically-motivated views.

For example the ONS (Office for National Statistics) are responsible for collecting, analysing and disseminating objective statistics about the UK’s economy, society and population.

This means that psychologists also have an important role to play in providing high quality research on socially sensitive topics.

AO3 of SSR (long-term effects)

Limitation of SSR - Poor research design may have a long-term impact.

For example, Burt’s (1955) research on IQ showed it is genetic, fixed and apparent by age 11. Led to the 11+ exam which meant not all children had the same educational opportunities.

Research later shown to be based on invented evidence but the system didn’t change and continues in parts of the UK today (e.g. Kent and Belfast).

Therefore any SSR needs to be planned with the greatest care to ensure the findings are valid because of the enduring effects on particular groups of people.