Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

AS PSYCH > Individual Differences > Flashcards

Individual Differences Flashcards

1
Q

What was the aim of study 2 in Rosenhan?

A

To see if hospitals who had been told they were to be approached by pseudo-patients would be able to tell sane from insane

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What was the aim of study 3 in Rosenhan?

A

To investigate patient-staff contact

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Describe the participants used in Rosenhans study

A

It was an opportunity sample
S1- hospital staff&patients
- 8 pseudo patients (various occupations e.g painter, housewife)
S2 - Hospital staff
S3 - staff from 4 of the 12 hospitals used in study 1
-staff at a college campus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What method was used in Rosenhans study?

A

Field experiment
S1&s3
S2 also collected data using participant observation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What ethical issues may occur in Rosenhans study?

A

Hospitals/staff deceived
Protection- may undermine confidence in doctors
However
Pseudo patients gave fully informed consent/volunteered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What quantitative data was collected in Rosenhans study?

A

S1- num of participants admitted/discharged
S2- num of faulty diagnosis
S3 - num of social interactions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What qualitative data was collected in Rosenhans study?

A

S1-pseudo patient observation
•feeling powerless, depersonalised
S3-

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What was the aim of study 1 in Rosenhan?

A

To see if people could get themselves admitted to a psychiatric hospital

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What practical applications can be made from Rosenhans study?

A

•reduce abuse of power in mental institutions
•change num of professionals used to diagnose disorders
-cant rely in one individual
•reduce stickiness of labels
•assess criteria used to diagnose mental illness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Assess the ecological validity of Rosenhans study

A

High-field exp, natural behaviour

Covert- few demand characteristics in s1&3

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What controls were used in s1 for Rosenhans study?

A

All pseudo patients behaved normally besides showing the same symptoms of hearing voices

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What controls were used in s2 for Rosenhans study?

A

None

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What controls were used in s3 for Rosenhans study?

A

Young female asked staff on a uni campus various questions

E.g im looking for a psychiatrist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Describe the IV and DV in Rosenhans study 1

A

Iv- patients pretence to get into hospitals

Dv- psychiatrist admission of patient and the strength of diagnostic label

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe the IV and DV in Rosenhans study 2

A

Iv-false info given to hospital

Dv-number of patients which staff suspected as being pseudo

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the IV and DV in Rosenhans study 3

A

Iv-patient or visitor

Dv-level of contact between staff and subject

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What 2 changed could be made to Rosenhans study?

A

1) make it a self report questionnaire instead of a field experiment
2) make it cross cultural to identify cultural sim/diff

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Additional evaluation to Rosenhans study(strengths)

A

Pros
•sample- range of occupations/states/hospitals/age/gender
So can infer cause and effect (results due to product of flaws in psychiatric profession not other factors)
•methodology- field experiment
Allowed pseudo patients to experience ward from patients perspective

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Additional evaluation points to Rosenhans study (weaknesses)

A

Cons:
•observer bias
Pseudo patients aware of aim so may pay particular attention/emphasise mistreatment (rosenhan his own pps)
•unreliable
Interactions after admission not controlled
Diff to record data accurately whilst participating

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Was Rosenhans study longitudinal or snapshot?

A

LONGITUDINAL
S1- 52 days
S2- 3 months
Long enough to show change over time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What can you conclude from rosenhans experiment?

A

P-We cant distinguish sane from insane all of the time, once labelled there is an expectation of the individuals behaviour to be due to this
E-7/8 patients in study 1 were admitted &diagnosed as schizophrenic
C-may be better to treat mentally ill patients in community healthcare schemes with behavioural diagnosis rather than institutions with sticky labels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Define depersonalisation

A

Where people aren’t treated as individuals, lack of respect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

When is powerlessness and depersonalisation show in Rosenhans study ?

A 
Study 3 lack of eye contact 10/1283 nurses
Supported by qual data
•observed inhumane treatment 
•toilets no doors(privacy) 
•medical records available to any staff
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the difference between a type 1 and type 2 error (Rosenhan)

A

Type 1- researcher diagnosis sick person as healthy (false neg)
Type 1- diagnose healthy person as sick (false positive)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Describe the individual differences approach

A

Examines how individuals differ in their thinking, feeling and behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Describe 3 key criteria used to define abnormality

A

Deviates from norm
Doesn’t conform to social demand
Painful to individual

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Explain 2 issues with defining abnormality

A

All 3 criteria sometimes appear in ‘normal’ people

Normality is culturally defined

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What is meant by a diagnostic label

A

Social sigma
Misunderstanding of ‘mental illness’
Fear of it
Discrimination eg employment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What are the key features of schizophrenia

A

Pos symptoms- additional to norm eg hallucinations

Neg symptoms- reduction in norm eg lack of motivation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What is meant by the medical model of abnormality?

A

See mental disorders as an illness with psychological causes treated with medication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What is meant by the anti-psychiatric movement?

A

Mental illness doesn’t have a physical cause, don’t fit society therefore treated with institutionalisation not medication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Thigpen and Cleckly is…

A

A case of multiple personality

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What is the aim of T&C?

A

To document the treatment of a 25 year old women with a history of severe headaches and blackouts that was later diagnosed with a MPD (multiple personality disorder)

34
Q

What method was used for T&C?

A

It was a LONGITUDINAL case study

•14 Months

35
Q

Practical applications from T&C

A
  • development to understanding the function of personality

* therapy options for those suffering from MPD

36
Q

What is MPD?

A

Multiple Personality Disorder

37
Q

What ethical issues occurred in T&Cs study?

A
  • not aware therapy sessions recored
  • no consent to book
  • privacy/consent/deception/withdrawal
38
Q

Ecological Validity T&C

A

Low- interviewed in an office, not within daily routine

•experimenter effect, may encourage certain behaviours from eve.

39
Q

What data was collected in T&C?

A

Quan=EEG, Psychometric test (IQ memory)

Qual= observations
•projective personality test

40
Q

Describe the sample used in T&C

A

25 y/o
Married women
Referred due to severe headaches and blackouts that had no physical cause
•therapy revealed ordinary emotional problems
•dr thought treatment working until receiving a letter, last para diff writing
•when asking Eve she became agitated
•posture/demeanour changed-eve black appeared

41
Q

Define personality

A

A pattern of collective behavioural/emotional/temperamental traits and character of a person

42
Q

Define MPD

A

Occurrence of 2+ personalities within the same individual each able to take control

43
Q

What is dissociation

A

Perceived deception of the mind from the body or emotional state
(May feel dreamlike)

44
Q

What changed could be made to T&C

A 
1) observe in own home
\+increase eco validity 
-ethics
Leads to increased validity 
2) use independent researchers
\+reduce experimenter bias
-decrease validity (if eve uncomfortable may give invalid response) 
Leads to increased inter-rater reliability
45
Q

Procedure T&C

A
  • 14 months
  • therapeutic sessions
  • self report
  • interviews with friends/family
  • EEG
  • IQ memory func (psychometric test)
  • handwriting
  • projective ink block test
46
Q

Describe Eve BLACK

A 
Mischievous 
Provocatively dressed
Rowdy
Unaffected by human emotion
Party girl
Egocentric
47
Q

Describe Eve WHITE

A 
Saintly
Sweet yet sad 
Sensible
Demure
Loved daughter deeply
Serious
Stooped posture
48
Q

EEG results T&C

A

Ew: 11 cycles per sec = normal

Eb: 12.5 cycles = slightly fast (associated with psychopath)

Jane:11 = normal

49
Q

Psychometric test results T&C

A

IQ: Ew=110 superior
Eb=104 inferior

Projective test:
Ew=repression, anxiety as her role as a mother, hostility to her mother
Eb=regression, desire to return to earlier life before marriage

50
Q

Hand writing results T&C

A

Varied between personality yet written by same individual

51
Q

Interpretation of EW and EB (T&C)

A 
EW= maintains nice 
EB= embodies anger

•one individual but personality at diff stages of life

52
Q

Who is jane? (T&C)

A

Compromise between EW & EB

•hypnosis used to bring jane out as main personality

53
Q

What happened in procedure 1? (Rosenhan)

A
  • 12 psych hospitals phoned for urgent app
  • pseudo complain of hearing voice (same sex, unclear, saying thud hollow empty)
  • pps gave false name/address/occupation everything else true
  • no pps had abnormal past
  • once admitted pps acted normally/showed no symptoms and took part in ward activities
  • all noted observations/experience whilst inside
54
Q

Outline the procedure in s2 (rosenhan)

A

Hospital made aware of findings from s1
•informed over next 3 months 1+ pseudo pps would try to be admitted
•staff rated the likelihood (1-10) as to whether they believe patient was pseudo

55
Q

Outline procedure s3 Rosenhan

A
  • in 4/12 hospitals pseudo patients approached staff and asked staff •’pardon me, could you tell me when i will be eligible for ground privileges’
  • avoided asking same staff more than once a day
  • asked as normally as possible
56
Q

Results from s1 (Rosenhan)

A 
•all pps were admitted
•7/8 diagnosed schizophrenic 
•shortest stay=7
•longest =52 
•average =19
•on release pps labeled "schizo in remission"
•normal behaviour mis-interpreted 
E.g early for lunch= behaviour distorted in order to fit in
57
Q

Results from s2 Rosenhan

A

193 patients were assessed
•41 rated pseudo by at least 2 staff
•23 by 1 psychiatrist

58
Q

Results from s3 (Rosenhan)

A

100% uni faculty responded to young f
23/185 psychiatrist made eye contact
47/1283 nurses responded to pseudo

59
Q

What was the aim of Griffith’s study?

A

To compare the behaviour and cognitions of RG and NRG

60
Q

What method was used in Griffith’s study

A

Quasi Field Experiment, snapshot

61
Q

Describe the sample used in Griffith’s study

A

60 pps
Mean age= 23.4
30 RG 29m:1f (gamble atleast 1x week)
30 NRG 15:15 (gamble 1x month or

62
Q

Practical Application from Griffith’s study

A

•rehabilitation if problem gamblers
•show RG may have cog biases
-can be helped by newly developed therapies to change their thinking

63
Q

Describe the eco validity of Griffith’s study

A

Field exp- high natural setting
However lack- using someone else’s £ may reduce risk/excitement
Thinking out loud- not normal

64
Q

Ethical issues in Griffith’s study

A

Fully informed consent given
Right to withdraw
Pps protection- given £ to gamble may be seen as encouragement

65
Q

What were the IV&DV’s in Griffith’s study

A

IV= RG/NRG

DV=skill/verbalisation/speed/perception

66
Q

What was hypothesis 1 in Griffith’s study

A

There will be no sig difference between RG and NRG on objective measure of skill

67
Q

Hypothesis 2 from Griffith’s study

A

RG will produce more irrational verbalisations than NRG (measured by thinking aloud)

68
Q

Hypothesis 3 Griffith’s study

A

RG will be more skill-oriented than NRG on subjective measures of skill

69
Q

Describe the procedure used in Griffith’s study

A
  • each pps given £3 stake(30 plays) to play fruit machine in local arcade
  • pps asked to try to stay on for 60
  • after 60 plays pps could carry on or take the money
70
Q

What 3 forms of assessment were used in Griffith’s study?

A 
1) behavioural 
•skill observed on 7 diff variables 
-total plays -end stake -win rate etc
2) thinking aloud 
•1/2 NRG & 1/2 RG asked to think aloud to gain insight to cog process 
-verbalisations tape recorded
3)post experiment interview
•semi structured 
-opinion on level of skill involved in fruit machine playing
-asked to judge their own skill
71
Q

Reliability of Griffith’s study

A

Inter=low categories subjective/bias

•only clearly understood by Griffith’s

72
Q

Outline validity of Griffith’s study

A

High- supported by triangular data
•observation •interview •thinking aloud
(Variety of data collection)

73
Q

What changes could be made ti Griffith’s study?

A

•use open questioned self report instead of thinking aloud
•use variety if gambling methods
-dice -cards -horse racing

74
Q

Data collection in H1 (Griffith)

A

Quantitative= behavioural measure of skill

75
Q

Data collection H3 (Griffith)

A

Qual- gained through semi structured interview

•perception of skill

76
Q

Data collection H2 (Griffith)

A

Qual turned to quan by coding system

•irrational verbalisation

77
Q

Findings from H1 (griffith)

A

Overall no sig difference
•RG slightly higher play rate than NRG
-8 per min // 6 per min

78
Q

Findings from h2 (griffith)

A

Overall
•both made more rational than irrational verbalisations
•RG produced more irrational than NRG (14% - 2.5%)
•NRG more rational questions
-“whats going on here”
•RG more personification of machine
-“the machine likes me”

79
Q

Define gambling

A

Activity of wagering money in an event where you do not know the outcome

80
Q

Key components of gambling

A

Stake
Predictability
Odds

81
Q

Define addiction

A

Behavioural pattern characterised by compulsion, loss of control and repetition of behaviour in-spite of adverse consequences

AS PSYCH (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions