Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For relationships people have predicted dissolution of relationships. However, i only have Duck's four-stage model in my notes for that. Will it only come up as a 5 marker?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hf1992)
    For relationships people have predicted dissolution of relationships. However, i only have Duck's four-stage model in my notes for that. Will it only come up as a 5 marker?
    its highly possible i will be a 25mark
    i have Duck and Lee, then a bunch of ao2
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    its highly possible i will be a 25mark
    i have Duck and Lee, then a bunch of ao2
    Oh dear... This is highly unsettling. I only have an outline of Duck's model in my pack of notes given to me by my teachers. Would you mind posting your essay while I bash my head against the wall. Thanks man!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hf1992)
    Oh dear... This is highly unsettling. I only have an outline of Duck's model in my pack of notes given to me by my teachers. Would you mind posting your essay while I bash my head against the wall. Thanks man!
    never had this one marked so not sure of the grade
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1.../edit?hl=en_US
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    never had this one marked so not sure of the grade
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1.../edit?hl=en_US
    Thanks man, not the longest essay, but hopefully the content will be enough for a high mark. You're a lifesaver. Seriously I'm paying over 20 grand to my school and they do this to me.... ugh
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hf1992)
    Thanks man, not the longest essay, but hopefully the content will be enough for a high mark. You're a lifesaver. Seriously I'm paying over 20 grand to my school and they do this to me.... ugh
    oh sucks
    thats actually the right legnth, my teacher is an examiner, she writes perfect 25 mark answers for us sometimes and they are only 1.2 pages because if you write 1.2 pages typed, in the exam, it amounts to over 2.5 pages hand written
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    oh sucks
    thats actually the right legnth, my teacher is an examiner, she writes perfect 25 mark answers for us sometimes and they are only 1.2 pages because if you write 1.2 pages typed, in the exam, it amounts to over 2.5 pages hand written
    Ohhhhhh, nice man. I suppose I'll need to reduce my 'Early experience on relationships' essay then. It's 1150 words lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Is this a valid way to answer a question on group displays of aggression or would I have to talk about evolutionary and social explanations instead?


    Discuss explanations of group aggression in relation to Sports Crowds or Lynch Mobs
    Explanations of group displays of aggression attempt to describe the initiating factors of behaviours and why an individual behaviour becomes that of the collective. Sports crowd behaviour and aggression may be examined using these explanations.

    It should be seen that similar behaviours by devoted fans, such as all wearing a football kit or buying a program may be explained by convergence theory. This theory suggests that events like football matches gather crowds of like-minded individuals with similar views to a specific location. This is beneficial for explaining group behaviours because it stresses the importance of cognitive thought and individuality, as the individuals making up the crowd choose how to behave in line with their own beliefs and values. This suggests that the convergence theory is perhaps less deterministic than other explanations, in that it stresses the importance of free will and higher cognitive function. This differs from explanations such as Freud’s psychodynamic approach, which suggests that there is a ‘merging of minds’, whereby the inhibitions of the individual are lost to the enthusiasm of the group, leading to behaviour outside of the ‘logical’ behaviour usually displayed by the rational individual. Determinism is valuable in the scientific process in order to attempt to identify certain pre-determinates that make particular behaviours likely. However, human behaviour is more complex than simple stimulus-response reactions because of higher cognitive function, therefore to suggest that sports crowd behaviour is out of the control of the individual is perhaps limited. This demonstrates the relevance of convergence theory.

    However, the convergence theory cannot explain behaviour in which the whole crowd takes on the behaviour of a select few, nor indeed how this escalates. In football crowds, booing may begin which then may increase to chanting and then to swearing. This is not the behaviour of ‘like minded individuals’ but rather behaviours that are imitated across the collective because of the atmosphere of the group. In the respect, Le Bon’s contagion theory is greater at explaining this behaviour. Unlike Freud, Le Bon suggests a ‘sponge effect’ whereby the actions of assertive individuals are ‘contagious’, spreading quickly to the rest of the group to create a shifting group mind. Blumer later incorporated the circular theory, whereby the imitation produces a competition for dominance amongst individuals in the group, amplifying the initial behaviour so that a ‘boo’ becomes an aggressive chant. This explanation is useful as it suggests how behaviour intensifies, however, many psychologists argue that many groups do not take on a mind of their own, outside that of the normal beliefs of every individual. This is perhaps especially relevant in terms of aggressive circumstances where violence occurs, such as the ‘hooliganism’ in international matches, which may be more attributable to evolutionary suggestion of ‘us and them’ proposed by Waller. Evans and Miller studied police reports of 40 football matches and found that there was a much higher degree of unrest in international matches, suggesting that evolutionary ethnic differences between both groups had an impact upon the level of aggression. Similarly, Smelser’s value added theory better explains violent behaviour whereby there is a structurally social conduciveness and strain, perhaps in the form of rivalry between fans exacerbated by victory or loss, which makes violent behaviour in the group more likely. Whilst explaining the influence of the individual in crowd behaviour, it is reductionist as it does not take into account cognitive processes, the ‘group mind’ ignoring the fact that many individuals do not become embroiled in chanting or booing, suggesting that other factors may be involved such as self-efficacy and self-esteem. Reductionism is important in isolating variables in experiments, allowing for a more holistic view when research is combined. However, the holistic nature of Le Bon’s explanation is tainted by its reductionism in relation to cognitive functioning.

    In this respect, Turner and Killian’s emergent norm theory may provide a more balanced view of crowd behaviour, emphasising both positive and negative effects of the crowd. The theory suggests that the crowd is made up of individuals with both similar and different worldviews but that the ‘society’ they are in is unique as it is without norms. Because of this, members look to others and imitate, especially to assertive individuals. This theory is perhaps more valid than Le Bon’s because it stresses the nature of the crowd constructed of logical thinking individuals looking for a ‘norm’, rather than a group mind developing outside of the views of the individual. Because it incorporates cognitive function, it is perhaps less reductionist than Le Bon’s also. However, the theory also struggles to explain violent behaviour, especially when it goes against the individual preferences of the crowd. However, it does explain why the ‘hooligan’ element is usually confined to a small contingent of the crowd, outside of the otherwise peaceful nature of the crowd. The theory explains why the crowd stands for the national anthem, as it becomes the established norm of the crowd, through imitation of individuals. However, the theory struggles to explain how these norms may emerge, especially in relation to the complex nature of the football crowd and non-verbal processes, which may occur, such as body language and events upon the pitch.

    Berk suggests that it is difficult to perform research upon crowd behaviour because changes happen at great speed, are difficult to predict and are none verbal. Consequently, observations are difficult to code in relation to small changes in behaviour and lab studies lack ecological validity essential in understanding individual processes. It must also be seen from the evidence above that no one explanation can account for all areas of crowd behaviour, leading Guttmann to suggest that the best approach is to combine the explanations to accommodate the different facets of crowd behaviour.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    oh sucks
    thats actually the right legnth, my teacher is an examiner, she writes perfect 25 mark answers for us sometimes and they are only 1.2 pages because if you write 1.2 pages typed, in the exam, it amounts to over 2.5 pages hand written
    Quick question:

    A weakness of Lee’s model is that it does not explain why the breakdown occurred in the first place, it only says what happens after the point of breakup. Furthermore as Lees model is before the breakup and Ducks model is after the breakup, there is the grey area of what happens in between these two stages that is not explain by any of the theories.

    Do you not mean 'before' the point of breakup?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hf1992)
    Quick question:

    A weakness of Lee’s model is that it does not explain why the breakdown occurred in the first place, it only says what happens after the point of breakup. Furthermore as Lees model is before the breakup and Ducks model is after the breakup, there is the grey area of what happens in between these two stages that is not explain by any of the theories.

    Do you not mean 'before' the point of breakup?
    Yeah i think so, Sorry i never checked over the essays, full of spelling errors but the info is there lol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    Yeah i think so, Sorry i never checked over the essays, full of spelling errors but the info is there lol
    Yeah just making sure loll. I haven't heard of Lee's model before lol. Thanks man.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hf1992)
    For relationships people have predicted dissolution of relationships. However, i only have Duck's four-stage model in my notes for that. Will it only come up as a 5 marker?
    yeh apparently it can come up as a 25 marker sucks i know, theres generally a lack of content.

    In my notes i basically have Rollie & Ducks 6 stage model (slight advancement on his 4-stage). I then have a few studies (Tashiro & Frazier/Segrin) that support different stages, then the standard methodological evaluation. Rollie et al has quite a lot of general evaluation, including IDA, for example practical applications (councelling if at intrapsychic stage). You can also talk about evolutionary explanations for break down ie men breaking up with a women due to not being able to conceive/cuckoldry, & bring in the typical, evolutionary therefore infalliable, so no empirical evidence etc.

    Let me know if you want any more info or something
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sweet&petitee)
    yeh apparently it can come up as a 25 marker sucks i know, theres generally a lack of content.

    In my notes i basically have Rollie & Ducks 6 stage model (slight advancement on his 4-stage). I then have a few studies (Tashiro & Frazier/Segrin) that support different stages, then the standard methodological evaluation. Rollie et al has quite a lot of general evaluation, including IDA, for example practical applications (councelling if at intrapsychic stage). You can also talk about evolutionary explanations for break down ie men breaking up with a women due to not being able to conceive/cuckoldry, & bring in the typical, evolutionary therefore infalliable, so no empirical evidence etc.

    Let me know if you want any more info or something
    Ah right nice man. Would be nice to have one short study supporting a stage in Duck's model for that extra evaluation. Thanks man!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sweet&petitee)
    yeh apparently it can come up as a 25 marker sucks i know, theres generally a lack of content.

    In my notes i basically have Rollie & Ducks 6 stage model (slight advancement on his 4-stage). I then have a few studies (Tashiro & Frazier/Segrin) that support different stages, then the standard methodological evaluation. Rollie et al has quite a lot of general evaluation, including IDA, for example practical applications (councelling if at intrapsychic stage). You can also talk about evolutionary explanations for break down ie men breaking up with a women due to not being able to conceive/cuckoldry, & bring in the typical, evolutionary therefore infalliable, so no empirical evidence etc.

    Let me know if you want any more info or something
    does anyone else learn economic theories here? they can be used for dissolution if that helps anyone
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kerry92)
    does anyone else learn economic theories here? they can be used for dissolution if that helps anyone
    Good idea, thanks.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Seriously? They wouldn't give a 25 marker on break up of relationships.. In my book there's only Duck's 4 stage model...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by worthyg)
    Seriously? They wouldn't give a 25 marker on break up of relationships.. In my book there's only Duck's 4 stage model...
    what book?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I do actually think they're more likely to give us a 25 marker on the relationship between sexual selection and human reproductive behaviour OR influence of childhood/adolescent exp. on adult relationships than on relationship maintenance or dissolution.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antipesto93)
    what book?
    Nelson Thornes'
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Is anyone using the collins book?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 7, 2012

University open days

  1. Norwich University of the Arts
    Postgraduate Open Days Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
  2. University of Sunderland
    Postgraduate Open Day Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
  3. Plymouth College of Art
    All MA Programmes Postgraduate
    Thu, 19 Jul '18
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.