Issues and Debates (Paper 3) Flashcards
Universality
characteristics of humans that are applied to all genders
Alpha and Beta bias
Alpha bias: research that exaggerates or overestimates differences between genders.
Beta bias: ignores, minimises or underestimates differences between genders.
- Most often occurs when a sample of p’s are made up of one gender
Androcentrism
male-centred. When ‘normal’ behaviour is judged according to a male standard, so anything else is deemed abnormal
Evaluation of Gender bias (2 S + 1 L)
Strength:
- Female Psychology
- The fact that the field of psychology has been so male-dominated has led to the development of female psychology.
- Because of this, research is more diverse and women are being studied more.
- This more comprehensive research better reflects the differences/similarities between genders
Limitation:
- Essentialist perspective
- EP: Gender difference is inevitable and fixed.
- e.g. mother and father in attachment
- Essentialist accounts are often politically motivated but disguised as biological facts.
- This means gender bias research could be used as a form of social control
- Enduring sexism in the research process
- Field of psychology is still predominantly male at the senior level:
60% of journal editors are men - Therefore, men are more likely to have their research published
Evaluation of Cultural bias issue
- Distinction between individualistic and collectivist cultures is too simplistic
- As we live in an age of global connectivity, cultures are less distinct
- In the past, Psychologists have made the distinction between individualistic and collectivist cultures.
- However, it’s been found that 14 out of 15 studies that compared the USA and Japan found no distinction.
- Suggests cultural bias is not as big of an issue as it once was
- ‘Scientific’ racist
- Culturally bias psychological research has been used as scientific justification for racism.
- eg IQ test results of African Americans during WW1 ‘found’ that they had the lowest ‘mental age’ of the population.
- Actually, the questions were ethnocentric (eg names of Us presidents)
- This was used as justification/validation to deny them access to education and professional opportunities.
- Demand Characteristics
- Research on non-westerners who lack global communication may be problematic as they don’t understand the scientific aims of the west.
- Therefore, the non-westerners’ characteristics may be exaggerated as they would not be acting naturally
- Consequence: Researchers no longer measuring what they claim to, findings can’t be generalised outside of research setting, validity lowered
Ethnocentrism
assumes one’s culture is superior to others, and that this is the ‘correct’ way to behave.
Etic vs Emic approach
Etic: Looks at behaviour from outside of a culture and aims to universalise this behaviour
(eg suggesting every culture eats with their hands) (having done research in india)
Emic: Researching within a culture and saying the behaviour found is specific to that culture (eg concluding eating with hands is a behaviour shown in Indian culture)
3 Types of determinism
1. Biological: Belief all behaviour is derived from biological factors that we cannot control.
2. Environmental: Belief all behaviour is caused by features in the environment that we cannot control.
3. Psychic: Belief all behaviour is determined by factors within our conscious mind, such as the effects of unresolved early childhood trauma.
Evaluation of Free will-Determinism debate (1 For Each + 1 against determinism)
Free will
For:
Face Validity (Intuitiveness) + Positive
- Our everyday experience give the impression we are constantly making choices which gives face validity to the concept
- Also, it’s been shown having a high locus of control leads to better mental health
- Been found that college students who have an external locus of control + belief in determinism are more likely to become depressed.
- Therefore, if we ‘think’ we have free will, we will have better mental health and behaviour
Determinism
For:
Scientific and therapies
- Determinism has its roots in science and suggests behaviour has a cause and effect.
- This allows us to make predictions and take measures to control individual’s behaviour
- For example, prediction that Schizophrenia is caused by an excess of dopamine has allowed drug treatments to be developed to counteract the cause
- Therefore determinism has helped improve quality of life of SZ patients and their families.
- Suggests that, for illnesses, free will does not apply.
Against
Extremes can be dangerous
- In the legal system, the defence against murder (for example) could be: “i had no choice” “i was destined to murder”.
- Therefore they would not be able to be procedures or even held morally accountable by the families
- Leads to more criminals in the streets, which is not good
3 Types of Reductionism
1. Machine: explains behaviour in terms of mechanic cognitive factors like a computer (input-output)
2. Biological: Explains all behaviour from simple biological factors. Based on the idea is as humans are products of our biology
3. Environmental: Attempts to explain all behaviour in simple stimulus-response links learned through experience.
Evaluation of Holism-Reductionism debate (1 For Reductionism + 1 Against Both)
Holism
Against
Holistic explanations are not scientific
- When studying an individual in detail, usually non-empirical methods and qualitative data must be used
- Which means these explanations can become obscure and speculative
- This limits their application. For example, depression can be due to many factors. Unless we test all of these factors individually and find out which is the most important, we cannot come up with the most effective treatment to help people.
- Therefore, in the real world a simpler (reductionist) method may be more suitable.
Reductionism
For
Scientific = Better practical application
- Reductionist explanations are open to scientific testing using empirical methods, which produces evidence that is observable and objective.
- Therefore causal relations can be inferred
- This gives us the ability to create better practical applications in treatments
- eg anti-psychotics for SZ
Against
Lacks validity which equals poor treatments
- Reductionist explanations can lack validity
- This is due to them sometimes being overly simplistic
- Therefore, losing validity when trying to explain complex phenomena (eg using genes, hormones to explain behaviours and overlooking the social/environmental factors)
- This can negatively affect treatments as if you only treat the biological factor, the social factors may still be affecting the P and be left untreated, causing relapse.
- Therefore, a reductionist treatment may not be as effective as a holistic one.
Evaluation of Nature-Nurture debate (1 against the debate, 2 for interactionalism)
Against (Mostly Pure Naturist)
Extremes can be dangerous.
- In the legal system, the defence against murder (for example) could be: “i had no choice” “It’s in my nature to murder”.
- Therefore they would not be able to be procedures or even held morally accountable by the families
- Leads to more criminals in the streets, which is not good
For Interactionism, Against Nature or Nurture
- Evidence for genotype and environment interaction - SZ Finnish mothers study
- Tienari et al found that a parenting style full of criticism and conflict was implicated for the development of SZ, but only in children that already had a genetic risk.
- Suggests a complex interaction between nature and nurture, and that maybe an interactionalist explanation would be better.
- Nurture comes from nature - Constructivism
- Hard to know to what extent people create their own environment (nurture)
- For example, someone who is innately aggressive (nature) seek out more violent media and influences (nurture)
- This is known as constructivism
- Suggests we shouldn’t separate the influence of nature and nurture on behaviour, and they shouldn’t be studied in isolation.
Evaluation of Idiographic-Nomothetic approaches debate (1 For each, 1 against Idiographic)
Idiographic
For
Provides a complete, holistic account of the individual
- This approach can challenge the general consensus of a theory
- For example, the single case study of KF (brain damage patient) showed why short-term memory is not as simple as the MMS claimed
- This provides justification for more research which led to more knowledge
- This ability to challenge views and further our knowledge is invaluable, making idiographic good
However..
Against:
Hard to generalise
- Meaningful generalisations cannot be made without more examples
- EG Freud’s little hans case study was based on one person and (very) subjective interpretations of data
- Makes idiographic investigation often unscientific and lacking practical application (due to it’s inability to be generalised)
Nomithetic
For
Largely scientific
- Use of large scale lab studies means it can be easily replicated under standardised conditions
- EG Pavlov dogs was a lab experiment that’s findings were used to make a general law about learning
- Makes psychology more scientifically credible.
Social sensitivity def
Studies in which there are potential ethical consequences or implications, either directly for the participant or for the class of individuals represented by the research.
Evaluation of Ethical Issues/So silly sensitive research (2 For, 1 Against)
For
Benefits of socially sensitive research
- Socially sensitive can benefit society as a whole
- EG research into unreliability of EWT has reduced the risk of injustice within the legal system
- Suggests sensitive research plays a valuable role in society and should be carried out.
Against
It has been used to ‘validate’ discrimination
- For example, in WW1 in the US an IQ test was created to test who should be officers or infantry, 1.75 million men were tested
- However, it was rigged so that anyone who wasn’t a white, middle-class white man scored poorly
- This resulted in many Black Americans being discriminated as stupid and not getting offered the same professional opportunities as whites.
- Shows SS research being used to ‘prop up’ discriminiez practices
For
Despite the issues, not doing socially sensitive research is irresponsible
- If there is no research, there is no discussion/potential to change
- Researchers can’t predict how their research is used, but they can be considerate of the biases possible and potential bad uses of them to be careful they don’t happen
- EG what could have been different if early IQ test developers reflected on their own biases?
