Chaney's Funhaler study Flashcards
(23 cards)
What was the theory underpinning this study?
Operant conditioning-
Behavior is made more or less likely using rewards or punishment
=> Fits with the behaviorist perspective which suggests that behavior is learned
What is the aim of this study?
To find out whether positive reinforcement using Funhaler could improve adherence to asthma medication in children
How was the research method used?
Field experiment
RMD
IV: Usage of standard inhaler or the Funhaler
DV: Amount of adherence to prescribed regime
Where was the study taken place in?
P’s own home, Western Australia
How was the data collected?
Data about P’s adherence was collected using questionnaires
How was the sample of this study like?
32 children (10 males,22 females) . 1.5-6 y/o
=> All P’s are asthmatic patients
=> All selected randomly via their doctors
=> Doctors
Was this a pilot study?
Yes.
How was this study carried out?
- Standard inhaler and the Funhaler are checked to deliver the same amount of medication (responsibility)
- Parents given a questionnaire to answer about their child’s adherence using the normal inhaler (mostly fixed choice closed Qs)
- Parents are then asked to give P’s Funhaler to use for 2 weeks
- Parents phoned at random times by researcher : check if the child had taken their asthma medication on the previous day
- After 2 weeks, parents filled out another questionnaire about adherence to Funhaler
How does the Funhaler work?
It rewards children using a spinner and whistle when they take their medication correctly
If child does not breathe deeply enough, the toys do not work
What were the findings for this study?
Important:
% of parents who said they had adhered to their child’s medication on the previous day (when telephone randomly) (can indicate volunteer bias)
Standard inhaler- 59%
Funhaler- 81%
% of parents who said they were ‘always’ successful in medicating their children
Standard inhaler- 10%
Funhaler- 73%
What do these findings indicate?
The Funhaler increases adherence to asthma medication in children
But more research is needed to find out whether the effects of Funhaler are long lasting
Yay research method!!!
- Controls are used
=> Increase internal validity
e.g. Questionnaire asked the same questions for standard inhaler and Funhaler
Naur research method!!!
- Demand characteristics
=> Self-reported data
=> Parents may have over-rated adherence to the Funhaler thinking this is what the researchers wanted to hear
=> Lower validity
=> Demand characteristics could also be caused by the RMD because they filled in both questionnaires
Yay data type!!!
- Quantitative
=> Easily compare adherence to standard and to the Funhaler e.g. compare %
Naur data type!!!
- Only quantitative
=> No details about why children adhered more to Funhaler than the standard
=> Researchers’ assumption that it was because of the reinforcement of toys on the Funhaler
=> Could have been for other reasons
e.g. Volunteer bias- parents are more enthusiastic when medicating their children, knowing this would be documented by researchers
Yay ethics!!!
Respect
1. Informed consent
=> Parents knew the aim was to test the Funhaler
2. Parental consent
=> Appropriate since children were under 16
=> They wouldn’t have understood that the aim of the study was to test the efficacy of the Funhaler so couldn’t have given informed consent
3. Confidentiality
=> Responses to the questionnaires were anonymized to respect P’s privacy
=> Parents whose children did not take medication would not have wanted this information published with their name
Responsibility
1. Protection from physical harm
=> Funhaler and the children’s standard inhaler were checked to have the same amount of asthma medication
2. Protection from psychological harm
=> RMD was used: everyone got the benefit of the Funhaler
=> No one were deprived of adherence improvement from the Funhaler
Yay ecological validity!!!
High
=> Children were going about their daily lives in their own homes while trying out the Funhaler
Naur ecological validity!!!
Volunteer bias
=> Parents may have acted more interested and enthusiastic when medicating their children than in real life
Yay reliability!!!
- Standardized procedure
=> Questionnaires were standardized
=> Length of time using the Funhaler is standardized
=> Easily replicable to see if the same results recur
Yay generalizability!!!
- Random sampling
=> The study represented parents and children from different socioeconomic backgrounds
=> Findings can be generalized to richer and poorer children
Naur generalizability!!!
- Age bias
=> Children were 1.5-6 y/o
=> Successes of the Funhaler may not generalize to older children who could feel to old for spinners and whistles, therefore not find them reinforcing - Culturally bias
=> Sample was only drawn from Western Australia
=> Base rates of adherence would be higher in far Eastern countries where obedience is entrenched in the culture e.g. Japan. Funhaler may make less difference in those countries
How can the findings of Chaney be applied? (usefulness)
For children with asthma
=> Shows that using the Funhaler can improve their adherence to their medicine
Suggests rewards can be used to encourage children to follow any medical regimes
However, further research is needed to find out whether rewards reinforce adherence in children with different medical conditions.
How did Chaney’s study change our understanding of behavior
Before: Postive reinforcement was already used as a stretegy to shape behavior
e.g. housepoints used to encourage good behavior
Finding: Adherence improved when children were given the Funhaler rather than the standard inhaler because of the toys attached
=> Effects of positive reinforcement were already known
=> Chaney only changes our understanding by a little by showing the same principle can be applied to improve medical adherence
