Healthy living Flashcards
(82 cards)
What approach does Abrahams’ study support?
The cognitive approach
How does Abrahams’ study support the cognitive approach?
Because it shows how people follow the health belief model by undergoing evaluative cognitions about changing their behaviour
What are the 4 sections of the health belief model and explain each one.
Perception of threat: Perceived seriousness of the issue
Cost benefit analysis: An analysis that weighs the pros and cons
Demographic variables: Social factors- Class, age, social norms
Cues for action: Physical symptoms, personal experience, internal cues.
Who created the HBM?
Becker and Rosenstock
What was the aim of Abrahams’ study?
To investigate the attitudes of condom use in the context of AIDS
Who were the participants in Abrahams’ study?
318 university students from Dundee in Scotland. Volunteer
What was the method of Abrahams’ study?
Questionnaire, self report method
What was the response rate in Abrahams’ study?
53%
What was the procedure in Abrahams’ study?
To get university students to complete a questionnaire that addresses attitudes towards AIDS and condoms. Some of it consisted of Likert scales about: condom effectiveness, condom attractiveness and condom offensiveness.
What were the results in Abrahams’ study?
Perceived seriousness of HIV didn’t affect behaviour so there was more cost than benefit.
Condoms were considered effective, offensive and unattractive.
What did Abrahams conclude from his study?
That the research supports the HBM in terms of cost benefit analysis
Evaluate Abrahams’ study. 4 things.
Holistic as it looks at cognitions as well as social factors
The study supports the HBM
Not generalisable
Bad response rate
What approach does Rotter’s study support?
The cognitive approach
How does Rotter’s study support the cognitive approach?
Because it shows how certain cognitions: blaming behaviour on internal or external causes can be linked to certain behaviour.
What is the context of Rotter’s study?
Rotter created a questionnaire that showed what locus of control you had, internal or external. Someone with an internal locus of control believes that the cause of their behaviour is themselves whereas someone with an external locus believes that behaviour is down to luck and other people.
What is the aim of Rotter’s study?
To investigate correlations between locus of control and behaviour
What was the procedure of Rotter’s study?
The procedure was to look at secondary data to see the results of people who had completed the locus of control questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of pairs of statements and you pick the one that applies to you. There was 6 filler statements to disguise the aim.
What were the results of Rotter’s study?
The secondary data showed that there was correlations between locus of control and gambling, smoking and persuasion behaviours. Externals were more likely to gamble and take risks, they weren’t as good at persuasion and they were more likely to smoke.
What did Rotter conclude from his study?
That internals can gain information and have the initiative to change their own lives. They can also resist manipulation and lead healthier lives.
Evaluate Rotter’s study. 4 things
- Reliable as it was repeated many times and got the ame results
- Holistic as it includes behaviour as well as cognitions
- It’s useful for CBT treatments
- People can be both internal and external so it’s quite deterministic.
What approach does Bandura’s study support?
The cognitive approach
How does Bandura’s study support the cognitive approach?
Because it shows that if one believes in themselves and has positive cognitions then they are more like to overcome the particular obstacle.
What is the context of Bandura’s study?
Self efficacy is when one believes in themselves and there are 4 variables that influence it. The variables: Vicarious influences (comparing yourself to others), persuasive influences (positive feedback), enactive influences (past experiences) and emotive influences (anxiety etc.).
What is the aim of Bandura’s study?
To assess the self efficacy of patients doing systematic desensitisation for snake phobias