EVALUATION PAPER 3 Flashcards
sexual selection
Clarke and Hatfield (male and female psych students on campus), Waynforth and Dunbar (lonely hearts adverts), partner preferences over the last century have undoubtedly been influenced by rapidly changing social norms of sexual behaviour (quicker than evolution)
physical attractiveness theory
Palmer and Peterson (physical attractiveness = politically knowledgeable), Touhey (sexist people care more about physical attractiveness)
matching hypothesis theory
Berscheid et al (people chose dance partners who matched them), Taylor et al (online dating websites: online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive than them)
filter theory
Kerchoff and Davis (longitudinal study – similarity in attitudes and values important in the ST, LT = complementarity, filter theory assumes that the key factors in a relationship change over time (RWA of successful marriages), research has found that cohabiting partners become more similar in their emotional responses over time, but other research has found that romantic partners over time bring their attitudes into line with each other’s
self disclosure theory
theory can be used to explain why relationships developed online may not succeed, Sprecher and Hendrick (correlations between several measures of satisfaction and self-disclosure), much self-disclosure research is correlational (less internal validity)
self disclosures in virtualrelationships
extent and depth of self-disclosure is dependent on the type of online communication, Whitty and Joinson (online questions tend to be more direct and personal)
absence of gating in virtual relationships
McKenna and Bargh (online communication by socially anxious people = more likely to succeed in relationships), BOTH: Walther (theories fail to take into account that almost all relationships are multi-modal)
social exchange theory
Kurdek (questionnaires measuring relationship commitment and SET variables), Clark and Mills (theory fails to distinguish between work and personal relationships), concepts of SET are difficult to quantify (rewards and costs have been superficially defined)
equity theory
Utne et al (couples who considered their relationship more equitable = more satisfied than under/over benefitting), McQuinn (equity did not increase in their longitudinal study of dating couples), Clark and Mills (theory fails to distinguish between work and personal relationships)
rusbult’s investment model
Le and Agnew (satisfaction, Clalt and investment size all predicted relationship commitment), Rusbult and Martz (battered women’s shelter), strong correlations
duck’s model of relationship breakdown
RWA (ways to reverse a relationship breakdown), most research involves retrospective reports after the relationship has broken down, most research is based on Western, individualist cultures and so the theory suffers from cultural relativism.
levels of parasocial relationships
McCutheon et al (celebrity attitude scale and anxiety in real relationships)
parasocial relationships: absorption-addiction model
Maltby et al (link between celebrity worship and body image in teenagers), better description than an explanation
parasocial relationships: attachment theory
Schmid and Klimmt (insecurely attached formed a parasocial relationship with Harry Potter in all cultures), research relies on retrospective accounts/evidence
free will vs determinism
D=doubtful that it would ever be 100% found in twin studies, D=position is incompatible with our notions of legal responsibility, FW=everyday experience gives the impression that we are constantly choosing our thoughts and actions, FW=activity in motor areas of the brain before having conscious awareness
nature-nurture
life experiences can shape biology = interactionist approach is more appropriate, strong commitment to both = hard determinism so interactionist is better, constructivism (people create their own nurture by actively seeking environments that are appropriate for their nature
holism and reductionism
R=possible to break behaviour down into its constituent parts and scientifically test them, R=explanations oversimplify complex phenomena, H=difficult to rigorously test scientifically and can become vague and speculative as they become too complex, H=more complete understanding of behaviour
idiographic and nomothetic approaches
I=in-depth, provides a complete and global account of the individual, I=qualitative methods are open to bias, N=more scientific, so makes psychology more credible as a science, N=preoccupation with general laws is said to have led to ‘losing the whole person’ within psychology
ethical implications and socially sensitive research
studies of underrepresented groups and issues may promote greater sensitivity and understanding (reducing prejudice and encouraging acceptance), USA in the 1920s and 1930s enacted compulsory sterilisation legislation for the ‘feeble-minded’, Sieber and Stanley (the way in which research questions are phrased and investigate may influence the way in which findings are interpreted.
gender bias
gender-biased research may create misleading assumptions about female behaviour, lack of women at senior leadership level means that female concerns may not be reflected in the research questions asked, Dambrin and Lambert studied the lack of women in executive positions in accountancy firms (included a reflection on how their gender-related experiences influence their reading of events. This reflexivity is an important development in Psychology.
cultural bias
assumption from studies may be that any differences between cultures are due to nature or genetically inherited factors and thus people from different ethnic groups may then be labelled with an incorrect stereotype, cultural bias may be less of an issue today (due to globalisation and the interconnectedness of cultures), conducting cross cultural research may challenge our Western ways of thinking and viewing the world and help to deal with cultural bias
symptom overlap
Serper (co-morbid schiz and cocaine abuse), Ketter (misdiagnosis = delays receiving relevant treatment)
co-morbidity
Buckley et al (50% depression, 47% substance abuse, 29% PTSD, 23% OCD)
cultural bias (schizophrenia)
Copeland et al (2% UK diagnosis vs 69% USA diagnosis), Escobar (white psychiatrists tend to over-interpret symptoms of black people)