Develomental Chaney Flashcards
Aim of study
To investigate whether new device ( fun hoaxer can provide positive reinforcement to improve adherence of using inhalers in young asthmatics
Behaviourist theory
Operant condition
The principle that behaviour learnt through rewards and punishments . Behaviour will be repeated if rewarded
What is positive reinforcement
Involves rewarding behaviour to encourage the behaviour to continue
Participants strengths and weaknesses
32 children 10’female 22 male aged between 1 1/2 - 6 mean age 3.2
All from Australia
Strength sample variety of ages more representative of children
Weakness - more boys than girls
All from Australia ,
Procedure
Contacted by gp or paediatrician
Researcher visited their home filled out a consent form and given a questionnaire about current device
Assessed compliance and attitude
Given fun halter to use over 2 week period
At various times in the period were randomly asked if had used device day before
Visited again where given another questionnaire comparing use of fh to sd
Results
Used funhaler day before - sd 59/. Fh- 81/
Achieved recommended - sd- 50/. Fh- 80/
Breath cycles
Who had successfully medicated child
Sd - 10/. Fh - 73/
Conclusions
Inhaler led to an increase use and correct use ( four or more breath cycles )
Parents also tended to be less likely to give up and resort to nebuliser if they were using a funhaler
Research methods
Field experiment - iv manipulated whether using standard device or funhaler
Carried out in participants regular setting
Repeated measures - assessed on use of standard device and funhaler through a series of questionnaires no individual difference but demand characteristics could have occurred couldn’t use counterbalancing as if used funhaler first may have been more likely to comply with standard device
Data
Quantitative - questions required a yes or no answer e.g had you used device day before?
direct comparisons can be made and draw conclusions e.g. Using funhaler increase medical treatment of asthma
Ethics
Although not told about funhaler at starts
Can be assumed followed ethical guidelines
Children were young so parents gave consent through filling out a form
Validity
Self report - social desirability - during period of children using funhaler parent were randomly phoned and asked had used device day before if hadn’t may not have wanted to look like a bad parent so lied and said yes reducing validity
Field experiment extraneous variables can’t be controlled
Can’t be assumed that funhaler was the only reason to adherence
Persitience of parents may affect this adherence
Ecological validity
Natural setting taking place at child’s home were usually use inhaler is high eco validity shows natural behaviour.
Questionnaire not natural - there were some interviews natural for children usually have to talk about inhaler adherence and problems
Reliability
Standardised - length of time funhaler was used
Same design , same instructions so action of funhaler would be the same for each child
32 is a small sample can’t establish a consistent effect
Sample
Arrow age rang affects generalisability but funhaler wouldn’t be expected to appeal to children above that age range appropriate sample for target population
Ethnocentrism
All from Australia if funhaler with toy built inside of it might not appeal to all cultures
Links to areas and perspectives
Development - illustrates how children learn and how parents can help their children to acquire desired behaviour ( positive reinforcement )
Behaviourist -
Operant conditioning - behaviour will be repeated if there is a reward and won’t be if there is a punishment
Shows that positive reinforcement ( reward when successfully medicating oneself would make spinner turn if whistle blow) cause behaviour ( adherence to device - medicating asthma was repeated )
Could support classical conditioning
Non adherence - with unpleasant experience e.g. Mother getting cross )
Funhaler - associate positively rewards would come - spinner or whistle would be set off when child has been succefukly medicated
Key themes
Shows that external influences ( positive reinforcement as suggested by behaviourist perspective ) increased a child’s adherence to treatment of asthma through an inhaler device as well as attitude towards treatment
How does Chaney change our understanding of key them
Adds t our understanding of how externals influences can have an affect on behaviour
Ban dura showed how children can learn through imitation in a process of learning
Chaney shows how can learn through process of positive reinforcement
Change our understanding of social individual and cultural diversity
Bandura carried out in America , Chaney carried out in Australia implies learning occurs whatever culture
Both studies use make and females and suggest learning does occur in childhood through imitation and reinforcement
Neither put insight of how external influences affect adults behaviour
Ban dura shows impact of cultural norms but not seen in chanteys study
Comparison with classic study
Similarities
- Young children as participants - quarantine data - importance of external influences on children’s behaviour
Differences
- b observation Chaney self report - Bandura large sample Chaney small sample , - carried out in America and Chaney in Australian
