aice pysch
Dement and Kleitman (1957)
Aim: To investigate the relationship between REM sleep and dreaming.
Method: Lab experiment with EEG recordings of sleep stages, participants woken during REM and non-REM.
Results: Participants were more likely to report dreams during REM sleep; eye movement patterns corresponded to dream content.
Conclusion: REM sleep is strongly associated with dreaming.
Strengths/Weaknesses: Objective measurements (EEG), but low ecological validity due to artificial sleep setting.
Hassett et al. (2008)
Aim: To examine sex-typed toy preferences in monkeys.
Method: Rhesus monkeys were presented with human "boy" and "girl" toys; behavior recorded and analyzed.
Results: Male monkeys preferred "boy" toys; female monkeys played with both types.
Conclusion: Suggests biological influences on toy preferences.
Criticism: Possible anthropomorphism; may not fully reflect human behavior.
Hölzel et al. (2011)
Aim: To investigate if mindfulness meditation changes brain structure.
Method: MRI scans before and after 8-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) program.
Results: Increased gray matter density in hippocampus and other areas.
Conclusion: Meditation can lead to physical brain changes associated with learning and memory.
Cognitive Approach
Andrade (2010)
Aim: To test if doodling aids concentration and memory.
Method: Participants listened to a dull telephone message while either doodling or not.
Results: Doodlers recalled more information than non-doodlers.
Conclusion: Doodling helps with cognitive processing and attention.
Baron-Cohen et al. (2001)
Aim: To test theory of mind in adults with autism or Asperger’s.
Method: Used the "Eyes Test" — participants judged emotional states from photos of eyes.
Results: Participants with autism/Asperger's scored lower than neurotypical controls.
Conclusion: Supports the idea that autism involves impairments in theory of mind.
Pozzulo et al. (2008)
Aim: To investigate the accuracy of child vs. adult eyewitnesses.
Method: Participants viewed a staged event, then identified the perpetrator from a lineup.
Results: Adults were more accurate with target-present lineups; children had higher false positives in target-absent.
Conclusion: Age impacts reliability of eyewitness testimony.
Learning Approach
Bandura et al. (1961)
Aim: To study if children learn aggression through imitation.
Method: Children observed an adult model behaving aggressively, non-aggressively, or not at all with a Bobo doll.
Results: Children who observed aggressive models showed more aggression.
Conclusion: Aggression can be learned through observational learning.
Saavedra and Silverman (2002)
Aim: To treat a child with a phobia of buttons using CBT.
Method: Case study of a 9-year-old boy; included cognitive restructuring and exposure therapy.
Results: Reduction in fear and disgust related to buttons.
Conclusion: CBT was effective for treating specific phobia.
Fagen et al. (1976)
Aim: To examine operant conditioning in infants using reinforcement.
Method: Used mobile kicking paradigm to assess learning and memory.
Results: Infants increased kicking when it resulted in movement of mobile.
Conclusion: Infants learn through reinforcement; supports operant conditioning principles.
Social Approach
Milgram (1963)
Aim: To investigate obedience to authority.
Method: Participants instructed to give increasingly strong electric shocks to a "learner" (actor).
Results: 65% gave the maximum 450V shock.
Conclusion: People will obey authority figures even against their morals.
Perry et al. (2013)
Aim: To analyze Milgram’s recordings and investigate participant beliefs.
Method: Re-analyzed audio tapes and transcripts from the original study.
Results: Many participants expressed doubt or suspected the shocks weren't real.
Conclusion: Raises questions about Milgram’s findings and internal validity.
Piliavin et al. (1969)
Aim: To study bystander behavior in a real-life setting.
Method: Confederate collapsed on subway; either appeared drunk or ill; measured time to help.
Results: "Ill" victim helped more quickly than "drunk" one; help more likely with more people.
Conclusion: Type of victim and group size influence helping behavior.