Issues and debates

Discuss gender bias in psychology, using examples of psychological research.

Androcentrism is the idea that theories and concepts in psychology are centred or focused on men, often to the neglect or exclusion of women. Hare-Mustin & Maracek (1990) suggest that there are two general types of gender bias. Alpha bias, this occurs when the differences between men and women are exaggerated and beta bias – this occurs when the similarities between men and women are exaggerated. The issue arises from gender bias as there are a range of consequences including, it can be scientifically misleading, it upholds and validates stereotypical assumptions and sex discrimination. We also have to be mindful that avoiding gender bias does not mean pretending that men and women are the same.

There is evidence of beta bias in experimental research, i.e., a tendency to reduce or minimise gender differences. Male and female participants are used in most studies, but there is typically no attempt to analyse the data to see whether there are significant sex differences. It may be possible that sex differences are found in psychological research because researchers ignore the differential treatment of participants. Male experimenters may treat their female participants differently from their male ones. Rosenthal (1966) reported that they were more pleasant, friendly, honest, and encouraging with female than with male participants. Such findings led Rosenthal to conclude: “Male and female subjects may, psychologically, simply not be in the same experiment at all.” A way to overcome this, is to have a more feminist approach to psychology.

Problems arise when there is an androcentric focus. Only using male animals in stress research because of hormone levels variations in females means that what they find in the male species would be true for females. Shelly Taylor demonstrates this by providing evidence of the tend and befriend strategy. This approach whereby females are able to tend to the needs of their young and befriend other females who may otherwise be a threat to them is more adaptive. The alternative fight or flight would suggest that females could flee leaving their offspring or fight and risk injury or death. This alternative would not be beneficial, suggesting the physiological understanding of stress lacks consideration of differences between the sexes. By only focusing on males meant that this went undiscovered and the stress response was not fully understood. It would be wrong to try and eliminate gender differences (this would be beta bias!) only to recognise there are differences but this does not mean one gender is better than another.

Within western cultures, alpha bias has been more common than beta bias. For example, Freud claimed that children’s superego or conscience develops when they identify with the same-sex parent. Girls don’t identify with their mother as strongly as boys identify with their father. As a result, Freud argued that girls develop weaker superegos than boys. However, Freud did admit that “the majority of men are far behind the masculine ideal [in terms of strength of superego]”. The evidence doesn’t support Freud. Hoffman (1975) discussed studies in which the tendency of children to do what they had been told not to do was assessed. The behaviour of boys and girls did not differ in most of the studies. When there was a sex difference, it was the girls (rather than the boys) who were better at resisting temptation.

By having a more feminist perspective psychological research may need to re-examining the ‘facts’ about gender. This would mean less androcentrism and reducing the view of women as normal humans, not deficient men. Perhaps it could also mean a research agenda focusing on women’s concerns creating a psychology for women, rather than a psychology of women

Discuss cultural bias in psychology, using examples of psychological research.

Discuss free will & determinism in psychology, using examples of psychological research.

Free will is the idea that individuals are capable of making their own choices, based on their own thoughts/decisions. These choices are an individual’s intention, this means that are behaviour is not random but is self determining. By being self determined we are free from influences such as instinct and past reinforcement’s history. Determinism is the idea that a person is shaped or controlled by internal or external forces rather than their own will to do something.

The Determinist approach suggests that all behaviour is determined and predictable. Behaviour can be determined by environment or biologically, inside and outside the individual. Depending on which view of determinism you take, will vary how you explain human nature. Biological determinism refers to the idea that all human behaviour is innate, determined by genes, brain size, or other biological attributes, such as hormones. Psychic determinism suggests that we are controlled by unconscious forces over which we have no control. These forces are internal, this refers to the libido and external, early experiences. Choice is only an illusion. Lastly, environmental determinism is where Behaviourists believe that our behaviour is influenced by our environment. Like the psychodynamic approach people believe that they are free to make their choices but they are in fact controlled by the factors in our environment this is also known as environmental determinism.

An example of biological determinism, explaining behaviour using innate biological systems can be seen in genetic explanations of aggression. The MAOA gene is responsible for metabolising neurotransmitters inc. serotonin, low levels of which are linked to impulsive behaviour. An advantage of this determined explanation is the ability to isolate the cause and to test its existence through family studies. Brunner et al. found a genetic mutation of the MAOA gene in males of a Dutch family who all had a history of violent crimes i.e. arson and rape. However, to only consider this determinist biological factor in contributing to aggression would be a problem because it assumes that human will have no freewill over violent actions. This leaves people unable to responsibility for their actions, something that the Law system adamantly disagrees with. This suggests that to isolate behaviours such as aggression to one biological cause may be an oversight. The evidence presented to support this is never a forgone conclusion, we cannot say X always causes Y, perhaps the other factor that influences our aggressive responses is freewill.

Another example of biological determinism is the physiological response of stress. In this way, the stress response is explained by looking at our nervous system in triggering the stress response. The hypothalamus detects the stressor and activates the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system which triggers the adrenal medulla to release adrenaline and noradrenaline into the bloodstream. These hormones cause physiological changes in the body such as an increase in heart rate. This is an example of biological determinism as this is alluding to the fact that our biology is the cause of stress. This is an issue because it assumes we have no choice in our response to certain environmental stimuli. Lazarus argues that individuals respond differently depending on the perception of the stressor. This would suggest we have an element of control over what we deem as threatening. This element of freewill can clearly be seen in the Stress Inoculation Therapy, whereby individuals alter their thinking about stress to help them cope in stressful times. This would suggest that we are not totally constrained but are able to have some autonomy in our lives.

However some psychologists, such as Skinner, argue that free will is an illusion. Skinner insisted that our behaviour is in fact environmentally determined, even if we are unable (or unwilling) to admit it. Also, more recent evidence provides some support for Skinner’s claim. For example, Libet et al. (1983) found that the motor regions of the brain become active before a person registers conscious awareness of a decision, i.e. the decision to move the finger was actually a pre-determined action of the brain. This strongly suggests that many

responses are biologically determined and that although we may believe that we have free will, Skinner’s claim that free will is an illusion, may be correct.

Also, mental illnesses appear to undermine the concept of freewill. For example, individuals with OCD lose control of their thoughts and actions and people with depression lose control over their emotions. Clearly, a pure deterministic or free will approach does not seem appropriate when studying human behaviour. Most psychologists use the concept of free will to express the idea that behaviour is not a passive reaction to forces, but that individuals actively respond to internal and external forces. The term soft determinism is often used to describe this position, whereby people do have a choice, but their behaviour is always subject to some form of biological or environmental pressure. Perhaps soft determinism is the compromise needed in the debate.

Describe & evaluate the nature-nurture debate in psychology, using examples of psychological research.

Discuss holism and reductionism in psychology, using examples of psychological research.

Reductionism refers to the approach that attempts to explain complex behaviours into simple components, whereas holism refers to the whole experience rather than individual features.

Reductionism is an approach that tries to explain a complex phenomenon such as human behaviour in terms of basic elements. i.e. can explain behaviour & experiences in reference to one factor e.g. physiology. Holism looks at individuals as a whole, or perhaps looks at all factors which together might explain a behaviour. One other aspect of this debate is ‘levels of explanation’. If you look at any one behaviour, there are different levels you can consider to explain it. For example, biological is a micro level whereas social is a macro level. This debate considers whether it is appropriate to look at one level or whether more than one level is appropriate.

An example of biological reductionism, explaining behaviour using biological systems can be seen in genetic explanations of aggression. The MAOA gene is responsible for metabolising neurotransmitters inc. serotonin, low levels of which are linked to impulsive behaviour. An advantage of this simple explanation is the ability to test through family studies. Brunner et al. found a genetic mutation of the MAOA gene in males of a Dutch family who all had a history of violent crimes i.e. arson and rape. However, to only consider biological factors in contributing to aggression would be limiting due to the importance of other factors such as the environment. Moffit’s study of MAOA-L children found people were 9 times more aggressive if they had been raised in an abusive environment. This suggests that to reduce complex behaviours such as aggression to a simple biological explanation is too simplistic, therefore it will be beneficial to take on a more holistic approach.

Another example of biological reductionism is the physiological response of stress. In this way, the stress response is explained by looking at our nervous system in triggering the stress response. The hypothalamus detects the stressor and activates the sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system which triggers the adrenal medulla to release adrenaline and noradrenaline into the bloodstream. These hormones cause physiological changes in the body such as an increase in heart rate. This is an example of biological reductionism as this is alluding to the fact that our biology is the cause of stress. This is an issue because it reduces stress to simplistic biological factors, whereas daily hassles and life changes have been found to play a role as a result of research from Kanner, for example, thus a more holistic approach should be taken in order to consider the subjective experience of the individual.

It seems that using the lowest level of explanations rarely is sufficient. The humanistic perspective states a holistic approach is much more appropriate for understanding complex human behaviour. They believe we should study the individual and their subjective experience to truly understand human behaviour that ultimately enables people to grow, develop and self-actualise. This approach sees people as unique with free will, something most people like to feel. It can be argued by looking at the whole person, it increases the validity of our understanding as we consider many possible contributing factors. This holistic approach can be evidenced by the development and success of therapies such as person-centred therapy. The whole really is greater than the sum of its parts!

The nature - nurture debate is the consideration of whether our genes and biology are the explanation for our behaviour, or if it is the role of nurture to shape us as we are ‘blank slates’ waiting to be defined.

One example of using the role of nature to understand aggression is to consider the genetic component such as the MAOA gene. This gene is responsible for metabolising neurotransmitters inc. serotonin, low levels of which are linked to impulsive behaviour. However, to only consider the role of nature is fraught with difficulties due to the fact that nature and nurture can never be separated. For example, Brunner et al. found a genetic mutation of the MAOA gene in males of a Dutch family who all had a history of violent crimes i.e. arson and rape. However, the environmental similarities may account for the male members’ behaviour being similar due to parenting style, peer groups and exposure to same media. It may be the case that in order to have a full understanding we need to consider both nature and nurture, for example, Caspi et al. discovered that the MAOA gene was only triggered when ppts. had experienced maltreatment in the environment. A clear example of diathesis stress model, the environment triggering a genetic predisposition.

Again, using the role of nature to understand stress is to consider the nervous systems role in triggering an acute stress response. The adrenal medulla is activated by the hypothalamus triggering the release of noradrenaline enabling the release of flight or fight when under threat. However, we do not all respond to the same stresses, there are differences. Therefore, just considering the biology does not help us understand why this is the case. The role of nurture can account for the differences in response to a stimulus. An example of this would be the transactional model by Lazarus whereby perceived stress is said to mediate our response. How we view the world, our perception, is shaped by our experiences and in this case also influences our physiology.

With this in mind the logical approach would be to take an interactionist understanding, the consideration of both biology, the environment and how they interact together to fully understand our behaviour.

Discuss idiographic and nomothetic approaches to psychological investigation

The idiographic approach in psychology attempts to describe the nature of the individual. People are studied as unique entities, each with their own subjective experiences, motivations and values. There may be no attempt made to compare these to a larger group, standard or norm.

The idiographic approach is generally associated with those methods in psychology that produce qualitative data, such as case studies, unstructured interviews and other self-report measures. This reflects one of the central aims of idiographic research: to describe the richness of human experience and gain insight into the person’s unique way of viewing the world.

The main aim of the nomothetic approach is to produce general laws of human behaviour. These provide a ‘benchmark’ against which people can be compared, classified and measured, and on the basis on which likely future behaviour can be predicted and/or controlled. The nomothetic approach is most closely aligned with those methods that would be regarded as ‘scientific’ within psychology such as experiments. These involved the study of larger number of people in order to establish ways in which people are similar.

The biggest advocate of the idiographic approach is that of the humanistic approach. It states that the unique human experience is the most valid way of understanding humans. Using a nomothetic approach sees people as all the same and does not value the individual. The humanistic approach rejects the scientific investigation, sees therapy as a focus on the individual and does not seek patterns and trends in the hope of being able to predict behaviour. They may have some credibility, the idiographic way is a full and rich source of data which would make it high in validity. The focus on the individual would also make it a positive approach with individuals at the heart of what they do.

In contrast, the physiological reaction to stress is clearly nomothetic as it applies to most humans. The adrenal medulla is activated by the hypothalamus triggering the release of noradrenaline enabling the release of flight or fight when under threat. However, we do not all respond to the same stresses, there are differences. Using a nomothetic approach and creating a universal law does not help us understand why this is the case. An idiographic approach can account for the differences in response to a stimulus. An example of this would be the self-report research into stating why they feel stressed and what they feel stressed about helps us understand these individual differences in stress and how that effects our response. How we view the world, our perception, is shaped by our experiences and in this case also influences our physiology. In this instance it would be beneficial to take an ideographic angle as well as a nomothetic approach for a full understanding.

All of the biological understanding of aggression is nomothetic. One example of using a nomothetic approach to understand aggression is to consider the genetic component such as the MAOA gene. This gene is responsible for metabolising neurotransmitters inc. serotonin, low levels of which are linked to impulsive behaviour. However, the environmental similarities may account for the male members’ behaviour being similar due to parenting style, peer groups and exposure to same media. In particular research into the effects of media could be classed as idiographic as it is inconclusive and could be argued individuals react differently. However, conducting idiographic research into these environmental factors would be a lengthy, time consuming process. That said, only taking a nomothetic approach would lead to oversimplification – a one size fits all approach. This is problematic knowing that any gene fault is only triggered by abusive environment, something the idiographic approach would have highlighted.

Perhaps the solution lies in the cognitive approach. Many case studies have been used to investigate a variety of cognitions such as memory. Clive Wearing has no short-term memory and little episodic memory. These case studies highlight the uniqueness of people and in particular when they suffer illness and damage to certain parts of their brains. It is from this that the cognitive approach is then able to conduct research to confirm the universality of such processes. It seems the idiographic stance prompts research - looking in detail at a case study leads to further research and from there all of the benefits of universal law such a treatment for the many

Discuss the ethical implications of research studies and theory, including reference to social sensitivity

Discuss reductionism and holism

AO1

• reductionism = analyses behaviour by breaking it down into smallest, most basic parts

• based on scientific principle of parsimony (that all phenomena should be explained using most basic principles)

• e.g. biological = genes/neuroanatomy

• levels of explanation = establish hierarchy as to whether psychology is a science - highest = social, middle = psychological, lower = biological

AO3

+objective - concrete observable elements, such as levels of dopamine on brain scan - contrast to exploring conscious experience = more bias and opinion

-simplistic - ignores complex interaction of many factors = lacks external validity - many different factors influence behaviour - environmental stress e.g. combination therapy (CBT)

Discuss free will and determinism

AO1

• Determinism = actions and behaviours are pre-decided due to our thoughts, biology and part experiences - free will does not exist and no choice in any behaviour we conduct

• Hard determinism = any behaviour caused by forces outside a persons control - ‘fatalism’

• soft determinism = actions/behaviours are to an extent dictated by internal/external forces - still some free will

• Biological determinism = all actions due to genetics (chromosomes, hormones) - low MAOA - 2.5% prisoners had low MAOA, but accountable for 50% of crimes

• Environmental determinism = past experiences shape future behaviour through reinforcement - phobias - little Albert

• Free will = self determining - we choose thoughts and actions - able to reject environmental/biological influences

AO3

free will

-not scientific as no behaviour can be predicted - cannot develop cause and effect = no generalisation = no treatments

determinism

+consistent with aims of science

-socially sensitive e.g. criminal gene

-does not account for individual differences - assumes everyone the same and everyone will respond same way to nomothetic treatments e.g. antipsycotics for schizophrenia

overall interactionist approach provides best compromise between free will vs determinism debate e.g. cognitive approach