This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Who is doing debates for PYA5!!!!

Scroll to see replies

me too...especially as i have learnt a really good answer...although if reductionism and nature nurture comes up im going to kill myself...

Reply 21

Sun

does anyone know what came up in jan 07?did anyone do that paper?

Reply 22

Beckifoxall

Oki, now here's an idea, why dont we all put our notes n studies together and come up with model answers for each of the debates?! :rolleyes:

Reply 23

cujo

becki that is a wicked idea.

Reply 24

Beckifoxall

Glad you like my idea :smile:

i just thort instead of us each struggling on our own, each of us know stronger parts of each of the debates, and you know what they say,

many heads are better than one!

Reply 25

star18

Yeh thats a good idea

I've revised three debates not reductionism as we werent taught it

Reply 26

Beckifoxall

we've just gotter figure out how this is all going to work.

we could all type our notes up and put them in this thread and then someone puts them all togetha! different studies n different explanantions

Reply 27

star18

Hmm yeh will b a bit tricky if all know different studies we could all do a detailed plan on any one aspect of each debate then put it up? Would that work? not sure :smile:

Reply 28

Beckifoxall

well have you been told what studies to do, because i havent, ive been told to think of my own examples from the past two years.

i think it'll be best if we all have more or less the same explanation of each debates first and then think of studies to go with it.

really it needs for all of us to be on msn in one big group convo and we work it out from there! would that be better for everyone?

Reply 29

cujo

yea becki lets get this done as soon as possible

the first question i think should be discuss 2 theories in relation to reductinism, or we can do nature nurture, free will.

Reply 30

Beckifoxall

whatever you want i need to revise all of it

Reply 31

cujo

lets do discuss reductionism in relation to 2 or more psychological theories.

K how will we start. BTW Becki i added you on msn.

Reply 32

eddybiel

Hi guys sorry to interupt the flow of the discussion, but i would just like to add my input.

Im doing the exam where question 6 & 7 involves:

Free will & Determinism
Reductionism
Psy as a Science
Nature / Nurture.

My view on things is that psy as a science is DEFINATELY going to come up. AQA never repeat any one topic more than twice, ive looked through all the exam entries since 2003. Nature / Nurture has been examined the last two years so it wont get repeated.

I suggest that people focus on psy as a science :smile:

But yea, posting example essays etc sounds good.

Reply 33

Daren

Had a nice big revision sesh today on 'Psychology as a science' and 'Nature Vs. Nurture', although it seems that this one won't be appearing in the exam. I think I'll concentrate on Psych as a science, Free Will vs. Determinism and reductionism.

Would be good if people could get there notes or model answers up for some a couple of the debates. I've used someone's notes from here on the Pro/Anti social behaviour topic for PYA4 and it really helps to get another perspective and pick up different arguments to your own.

I'm not quite understanding all this talk of how they word the questions. If they say, for example, discuss nature vs. nuture in relation to 2 or more theories, do you disscuss gender development or schizophrenia and how different studies support the nature or nuture side? Or have I got the complete wrong end of the stick?

Cheers guys...

Reply 34

AlmostInsane

The lack of revision I've done for debates isn't even funny,
I'm so confused by it all.
So any help would be great!?

Reply 35

geographyrevision

ok im planning on writing a plan for my 3 chosen debates: psy as a science, nature vs nurture and free will n determinism over the next few days. I will do one today then post it on here tonight, you could then all chip in and put constructive comments that wil help us all. does that sound like a plan?

Reply 36

geographyrevision

here is my attempt at a past question:

Explain what is meant by the terms nature and nurture (5 marks)
Nature is the extent to which abilities are present at birth. Ability can be determined by genes, including those which develop by age. The biological and evolutionary approach both support the view that all behaviour is determined by nature.
Nurture refers to the influence of experience. Empiricists had the view that all behaviour is learnt and that through reciprocal determinism we influence the environment as the environment influences us. The behaviourist approach is the most common supporter of this view.

Outline the history of the nature-nurture debate in psychology (10 marks)
Philosophers in ancient times, such as Plato, believed that a child was born with some innate knowledge. Rather than learning anything new, people simply recollected knowledge which lay dormant within their mind.
Locke, however, was an Empiricist and believed that the mind at birth was a blank slate. He believed that all behaviour was learnt and that the environment and up-bringing made people behaviour in certain ways.
In the 19th century there was much tension around the argument. In order for the debate to be tested, psychologists looked at changing behaviour, such as maladaptive behaviour. If behaviour was to be changed for the better then it made sense that only the environment could do this (nurture). Behaviourists, such as Locke, supported this view due to their assumptions of classical and operant conditioning. However at the time, the dominant view was that behaviour was fundamentally hereditary. Many thought behaviour was a product of biological influence. Therefore environmental influences were limited.
By the mid 20th century there were two main thoughts. American behaviourists concluded that all behaviour is learnt through trial and error (nurture). Their work was conducted on animals yet Waal (1999) saw this as irrelevant and stated learning processes were universal across species.
In contrast the ethological school in Europe focused on natural behaviour. According to this theory animals are born with abilities. They used the example that you do not learn to cry or laugh.
Contemporary beliefs are that it is in fact an interaction of both nature and nurture that determines behaviour.

To what extent is it possible to explain behaviour in terms of only nature or nurture? (15 marks)
Some behaviour more than others suit either the nature or nurture view more appropriately. The evolutionary approach explains behaviour as a result of nature. Bowlby (1969) suggested that attachment behaviours are displayed because they ensure the survival of the infant. It is also instinctive of the parent to make this attachment. By making attachments infants are set-up for later life increasing their chance of reproduction, thus extending there genes.
Yet a behaviourist would state that rather than nurture, individuals learn to make attachments through classical conditioning. An infant learns that as attachments are made food, play and love is given, therefore reinforcing and rewarding behaviour. As an infant ages, they will learn through modelling that the more attachments made then the more rewarding and simply life can become (in terms of large friendship groups).
It could be said that stress is an adaptive response to environmental pressures. Animals which are born with out such responses (including the fight or flight response) quickly die. However behaviourists would claim that in certain environments stress is encouraged (such as some exam stress is seen as motivation). Therefore through rewards and reinforcement, individuals display and experience stress.
The behaviour of aggression could be explained in terms of nurture. Bandura’s bobo doll studies provide evidence that behaviour can be modelled and imitated through vicarious reinforcement, especially if the model is similar to the viewer in terms of age and personality. However nativists would claim that those individuals who become aggressive are already pre-disposed to the behaviour through their genes and that if that gene is not present than a person is unlikely to experience aggression.
However it is impossible to assume that all behaviour is determined by either nature or nurture. Instead the interaction of the two by gene-environment relationship has more face validity and is being supported now by more psychologists, including the Psychodynamic approach. Using the three types of relationship I will show various ways in which a child may be musical. The first type of relationship is passive. An example of this would be a musical parent transmitting a musical gene to their offspring, then constructing a musical environment to rear their children. An evocative relationship would be if a child was musically gifted (i.e. had the pre-disposed gene) and then received special training and opportunities by teachers (therefore rewarding and encouraging such behaviour). The third is an active relationship where individuals are pre-disposed to the gene and then select their own environments to match them (e.g. a musical child chooses musical friends).
In the diathesis-stress model, a genetic vulnerability or predisposition (diathesis) interacts with the environment and life events (stressors) to trigger behaviors or psychological disorders. The greater the underlying vulnerability, the less stress is needed to trigger the behavior/disorder. Conversely, where there is a smaller genetic contribution greater life stress is required to produce the particular result. Even so, someone with a diathesis towards a disorder does not necessarily mean they will ever develop the disorder. Both the diathesis and the stress are required for this to happen.

Reply 37

star18

Thanks for that will put some stuff up when i have done it
Btw everyone don't need to know about history of the nature nurture debate has been removed from specification

Reply 38

geographyrevision

yip found that out after i had done this practice question (which was from a paper a few years ago) and my teachers emailed it back marked and said that this had been removed. still useful though as an introduction to the essay

Reply 39

danny_g

star18

Thanks for that will put some stuff up when i have done it
Btw everyone don't need to know about history of the nature nurture debate has been removed from specification

Thank God for that! Thats the first time i've seen that question and i realised i didnt know anything about the history of the nature/nurture debate. phew :smile: