Chaney (2004) Flashcards
(27 cards)
Background
-In Australia around 1/4 of children have asthma
-Second most common cause of paeds hospital admissions and school absences
-Compliance with asthma medication is extremely low-30%-70% for all age groups
-Asthma spacer devices were developed to help children ,ensure out the correct dosage of asthma medication
Operant conditioning
Learning from the consequences of behaviour
Positive reinforcement
The action leads to gaining something pleasant
Negative reinforcement
The action leads to getting rid of something unpleasant
Aims
-All inhalers are negatively reinforcing, as they remove asthma symptoms
-Chaney wanted to see if the principles of positive reinforcement could be used in a spacer to help show children how to use the inhaler properly
-If the child used the funhaler correctly, the whistle would sound and the disc would spin round
-Incorporates both negative and positive reinforcement
Sample
-32 children, 20 boys and 10 girls
-Aged 1.5 to 6 years old
-From 7 different paeds/GP clinics within a 51km radius of Perth, Australia
-Clinics were from varying socioeconomic and geographical areas
Procedure 1
-Parents contacted by phone before being visited at home
-Written and informed consent given by parents
-Parents filled in a written questionnaire about their Childs current inhaler spacer device
Procedure 2
Parents were given a funhaler to use with their child for two weeks
Procedure 3
-After the two weeks parents were given another questionnaire to fill in
-This one asked them about use of the funhaler
Findings/conclusions
-Behaviour: 50% of children achieved the desired 4 or more breath cycles per delivery with their previous spacer device, this increased to 80% with the funhaler
-Attitudes: 10% of parents said they were completely happy with their previous spacer device, 61% said they were happy with the funhaler
Which side of the nature/nurture debate does the study link to?
-Nurture
-Children’s behaviour is changing as a result of the funhaler
Which side of the freewill/determinism debate does the study link to?
-Deterministic
-Children’ asthma medication usage is determined by what inhaler they have at the time
How does the study link to the behaviourist perspective?
It explains how children are learning behaviours due to operant conditioning
How does the study link to its key theme of ‘External influences on children’s behaviour’?
It explains how the funhaler (an external influence) is changing their medical compliance
How does the study link to the developmental area?
It is showing how children’s behaviour can change due to the experience of the funhaler
Two similarities between Chaney and Bandura
-Both studied young children
-Both sit on the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate
Explain the similarity ‘both studied young children’
-Bandura studied children aged 37-69 months from Stanford University nursery
-Chaney studied children 1.5-6 years old suffering from asthma from around Perth, Australia
Explain the similarity ‘both sit on the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate’
-Bandura explained how the experience of watching an aggressive model made children imitate these actions
-Chaney explained how the experience of using a funhaler changed the compliance of children towards the asthma medication
Two differences between Chaney and Bandura
-How they collected their data
-The experimental design they used
Explain the difference of ‘how they collected their data’
-Bandura collected data using observation through a one way mirror for 20 minutes in stage three
-Chaney collected data through self report questionnaires about the behaviours and attitudes towards the inhalers
Explain the difference of ‘the experimental design they used’
-Bandura used matched participants by pre-testing the children on 4x5 point scales of aggression
-Chaney used repeated measures by giving parents questionnaires about the regular inhaler, then the funhaler 2 weeks later
How has Chaney’s study changed our understanding of ‘external influences on children’s behaviour’ since Bandura?
It has shown us that the behaviour of children can be changed by reinforcement, rather than just observation and imitation
How hasn’t Chaney’s study changed our understanding of ‘external influences on children’s behaviour’ since Bandura?
Both studies are still telling us about young children
How has Chaney’s study changed our understanding of cultural diversity?
The study was carried out in Australia, whilst Bandura’s was done in the USA
