Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Questions that ask - discuss this debate with reference to 2 or more psychological theories and/or research studies?

    Is this saying that we can choose any of the hundreds of theories?? The book doesn't give any examples of theories to use for each debate.

    Anyway, can anyone tell me which theories are good to learn for which debates.
    The debates I'm doing are;

    Free will vs determinism
    psychology as a science
    nature vs nurture

    obviously i'm a bit of an idiot when it comes to this exam, since I didn't even know how the questions were structured, so if there's anything else I need to know, please tell me! thanks. :confused:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amylouise)
    Questions that ask - discuss this debate with reference to 2 or more psychological theories and/or research studies?

    Is this saying that we can choose any of the hundreds of theories?? The book doesn't give any examples of theories to use for each debate.

    Anyway, can anyone tell me which theories are good to learn for which debates.
    The debates I'm doing are;

    Free will vs determinism
    psychology as a science
    nature vs nurture

    obviously i'm a bit of an idiot when it comes to this exam, since I didn't even know how the questions were structured, so if there's anything else I need to know, please tell me! thanks. :confused:
    For free will versus determinism I've got psychoanalytic theory (psychic/biological determinism), and behavioural theory - classical/operant conditioning (environmental determinism).. Although you'd probably have to mention that skinner's since suggested that we somehow both control and are controlled. You could possibly get some AO2 points from using humanistic approach, which is based upon the assumption of free will.

    Can anyone explain the difference between determinism & efficient causality? It'd be extremely appreciated!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Oh yes the other 2.. Hehe.

    I haven't revised this unit yet but I think that for Psychology as a Science I would choose to use behavioural theories again, and .. hmm. Maybe psychodynamic stuff again to show not scientific ness! Otherwise I can imagine a lot of the stuff on memory would be quite good to illustrate the use of scientific method. :confused:

    Nature & Nurture - I'd use behavioural theories.. And I don't know what else.

    Wow.. I really need to read some more replies for this!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I've just looked back over mod 5, i am very scared :eek:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fivebyfive)
    I've just looked back over mod 5, i am very scared :eek:
    Chill There's a few days before the exam. Lets build up the studies/theories here and then we'll all have plenty to refer to in the exam!! !! Come on people who know this stuff!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Okay so here's the stuff that you need to know according to the syllabus.

    Free will and determinism, including definitions of these terms,
    arguments for and against their existence, and assumptions made
    about them in psychological theory and research (e.g. Freud’s and
    Skinner’s theories).

    Reductionism, including reductionism as a form of explanation,
    examples of reductionism in psychological theory and research
    (e.g. physiological, machine, experimental), and arguments for and
    against reductionist explanations.

    Psychology as science, including definitions/varieties of science, the
    development of Psychology as a separate discipline, and arguments
    for and against the claim that Psychology is a science (e.g. Kuhn’s
    concept of a paradigm, objectivity, and the use of the experimental
    method).

    Nature-Nurture, including definitions of the terms, the history of the
    debate, assumptions made about nature and nurture in psychological
    theory and research (e.g. Piaget’s theory and sociobiology), and
    different views regarding their relationship (e.g. gene-environment
    interaction).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What about reductionism? Would it be ok to talk about psychosexual stages here?

    I also think it's so hard to discuss humanism for the Free Will question . . . There's nothing to say about it except self-actualisation!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ButterCookie)
    What about reductionism? Would it be ok to talk about psychosexual stages here?

    I also think it's so hard to discuss humanism for the Free Will question . . . There's nothing to say about it except self-actualisation!
    But then you'd have to talk about how self-actualisation *COULD* be considered to be final causal determinism unless you see it as something you DO rather than something you AIM to achieve.

    You could also draw out the point by referring to humanistic therapies, how they aim to enable clients to exercise their free will (suggesting perhaps that it takes some practice to do that.. :confused: )

    I'm not doing reductionism because I found it mind numbing. But I guess the logic is right to describe psychosexual stages as reductionist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ButterCookie)
    What about reductionism? Would it be ok to talk about psychosexual stages here?

    I also think it's so hard to discuss humanism for the Free Will question . . . There's nothing to say about it except self-actualisation!

    For the freewill I think you're sorted if you mention the two key figures Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and the kind of work they try to do (insisting that determinism is dangerous and encouraging people to live out their full potential) and alongside humanism discuss cognitive which will allow you to be objective since its a bit of both- come on people, alongside our own revision we can revise together on here lol.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eternalsunshine)
    Chill There's a few days before the exam. Lets build up the studies/theories here and then we'll all have plenty to refer to in the exam!! !! Come on people who know this stuff!!
    Yeah c your point, thanks and i thought PYA4 went well.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    my plan is to be as ambiguous in my answer as they are in their textbooks. Free will, holism, determinism, self actualisation etc are all so wishywashy to me! They seem to be making a debate out of nothing. I'm gonna learn the language in the textbooks and then write as if my sentences make sense (although I don't actually understand the ideas myself I seemed to get good marks in my essays this year)

    and the approaches question....I love it! marks handed to you on a silver platter with a cherry on top

    which approaches are people using? my teacher told us to do biological but they can't seriously expect me to write... "steve is obsessed with football becuse of a hormonal imbalance, genetics and an abnormal brain structure" or are they really that easy?!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think all approaches will apply to everything. You get marks for the appropriateness of your selection. I'd learn atleast 3 or 4 appraoches.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The only difficulty in approaches is the part c). You have to invent a way of studying the behaviour. Fairly simple though, I guess.

    I actually think Section A is the worst part, because it's the most ambiguous in as much as it could be anything, and you don't get a choice. I am doing Issues rather than debates, but for all of Issues/Debates, you can almost learn parrot-fashion an essay. Approaches is also ambiguous, but as long as you know 3 or 4 approaches solidly, it's nothing to worry about at all, simply turning it into a contextualised form.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I just did a practise question, and I'd really appreciate some feedback on it



    Mark always had to have the latest mobile phone on the market, before any of his friends. He actually did not use the phone that much but still wanted to have all the features, colour screen, built in camera, flashing lights, and a seemingly endless range of ring tones.

    (a) Describe how a desire for the latest fashions might be explained by two different approaches
    (6 marks + 6 marks)


    (b) Assess one of these explanations of desire for the latest fashions in terms of its strengths and limitations.
    (6 marks)

    (c) How might desire for the latest fashions be investigated by one of these approaches?
    (6 marks)

    (d) Evaluate the use of this method of investigating desire for the latest fashions.
    (6 marks)


    (a) The desire for latest fashions can be explained by the behaviourist approach. Trend-setters such as pop stars and respected people would make people associate such items (e.g., mobile telephones and indeed clothes) with these people; this is termed classical conditioning. Also, this association would have a stronger influence if the persons setting the trend or the new fashion were similar to Mark; it has also been suggested by Social Learning Theory that those of a higher status (e.g., celebrities) would encourage someone like Mark to become more determined on acquiring such material items. Operant conditioning would also play a role (i.e., direct reinforcement) as people around him – most likely his peers – would reward Mark with praise and excitement at having seen the telephone; this would also encourage the drive for purchasing future fashionable items. Finally, vicarious reinforcement may play a part, by seeing other people with these items being rewarded just as Mark would be.


    Another approach the desire can be explained by is the evolutionary approach. In the EEA, individuals and groups would have needed to gather and conserve the best resources they could in order to promote future survival and enable perpetuation of their gene pool. The mobile telephone could be considered a ‘tool’ for making Mark’s life easier – this would once have promoted survival. Furthermore, these types of ‘adornments’ would help reproductive success by making Mark more attractive to females through sexual selection; this would have been vital in the past: for example, with Indians, where decorative head-dresses and brightly coloured assets would help in attracting a mate. Research has found that females seek men with resources in today’s society; this innate genetic desire could be where this behaviour stems from.


    (b) The behavioural approach has been criticised for being reductionist and determinist. It is reductionist in that it can explain Mark’s behaviour in very simple stimulus – response terms and by means of social learning (i.e., classical and operant conditioning); however, the problem in this approach lies in the fact that many (including social psychologists) would state that there may be other processes involved such as conformity which may occur if some (or all) of Mark’s friends have a similar mobile telephone. The explanation is determinist because it suggests how you behave is manipulated by factors outside your control, whereas again most people (including humanistic psychologists) would feel that they freely choose to obtain the latest fashionable product.

    On the positive side, behaviourist accounts lend themselves to scientific proof because the variables can be operationalised, which means we could investigate one of the explanations to see if it was right. More importantly, the approach is very parsimonious and can be generalised to other aspects of Mark’s life, such as why he may desire other fashionable items other than a mobile telephone.

    (c) A behaviourist is likely to use an experiment as it makes it easy to control variables and demonstrate whether the explanation is right. To do this, you would work out a suitable hypothesis derived from your explanation. One hypothesis might be ‘participants’ desire to own a mobile telephone will increase when exposed to individuals being vicariously reinforced for owning one’. Each participant, taken from a quota sample, would be shown a videotape of a group of people in a social situation; one of their phones would ring and everyone would stare in amazement; consequently, the owner would receive direct praise. The videotape could be incorporated into a short film so the participants didn’t catch on and develop demand characteristics. This experiment would use a matched pairs design containing two conditions: one group would watch the videotape and the other wouldn’t; this type of grouping would ensure the two groups were similar in age, status and gender. Later, participants in both groups would be asked to rate their desire to own a mobile telephone – it would have to be a single-blind experiment so that participants would not exhibit demand characteristics. This would mean you must debrief the participants afterwards. You could then compare the average ratings of each group on the importance of owning a feature-rich mobile telephone with each other and determine what effect the film had on their behaviour.

    (d) One of the strengths of the experimental approach is that you can demonstrate cause and effect so the experiment above would allow us to claim that association with prestige, status and admiration caused peoples’ desire to own such a fashionable item to heighten. However, this is such an artificial situation that it may not relate to real life, where many other factors would be involved.

    Using matched pairs is good because it controls for participants determining the aim of the study and adopting demand characteristics. This would overcome the problem that participants will artificially mark down the same score before and after the experiment; these factors, if not controlled properly, could threaten the validity of the findings.

    Generalising from an experiment is also problematic because of the sample of people used. It is hard to get a representative sample, especially when using matched pairs design as individual differences will always play a part in experiments like this (however extrinsically similar people may seem). So, reservations should be made about this when concluding the results of the experiment.

    There is also the issue of ethics to consider. Manipulating peoples’ behaviour as in this experiment is unethical, especially when it may influence them to purchase a product purely as a result; however, debriefings after the experiment should account for this and enable participants to see the real reason behind the study. Ideally, you should reverse this process by showing another videotape but with adverse reactions to the telephone (such as it being annoying due to it interrupting a social situation), but you cannot be sure how effective this would be.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Please take a look at this post I made in another thread and leave your thoughts here.

    Link: http://www.uk-learning.net/showpost....64&postcount=5
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Surfing Hamster)
    (a) The desire for latest fashions can be explained by the behaviourist approach. Trend-setters such as pop stars and respected people would make people associate such items (e.g., mobile telephones and indeed clothes) with these people; this is termed classical conditioning. Also, this association would have a stronger influence if the persons setting the trend or the new fashion were similar to Mark; it has also been suggested by Social Learning Theory that those of a higher status (e.g., celebrities) would encourage someone like Mark to become more determined on acquiring such material items. Operant conditioning would also play a role (i.e., direct reinforcement) as people around him – most likely his peers – would reward Mark with praise and excitement at having seen the telephone; this would also encourage the drive for purchasing future fashionable items. Finally, vicarious reinforcement may play a part, by seeing other people with these items being rewarded just as Mark would be.


    Another approach the desire can be explained by is the evolutionary approach. In the EEA, individuals and groups would have needed to gather and conserve the best resources they could in order to promote future survival and enable perpetuation of their gene pool. The mobile telephone could be considered a ‘tool’ for making Mark’s life easier – this would once have promoted survival. Furthermore, these types of ‘adornments’ would help reproductive success by making Mark more attractive to females through sexual selection; this would have been vital in the past: for example, with Indians, where decorative head-dresses and brightly coloured assets would help in attracting a mate. Research has found that females seek men with resources in today’s society; this innate genetic desire could be where this behaviour stems from.
    Your answers here are very accurate. You have mentioned quite a few of the areas of behaviourist psychology, although you could perhaps have gone into more details with regards to stimuli (NS, US, CS) in classical conditioning. 5 marks.
    You show a very good understanding of the evolutionary approach. Your answer is coherent and detailed. 6 marks.

    (Original post by Surfing Hamster)
    (b) The behavioural approach has been criticised for being reductionist and determinist. It is reductionist in that it can explain Mark’s behaviour in very simple stimulus – response terms and by means of social learning (i.e., classical and operant conditioning); however, the problem in this approach lies in the fact that many (including social psychologists) would state that there may be other processes involved such as conformity which may occur if some (or all) of Mark’s friends have a similar mobile telephone. The explanation is determinist because it suggests how you behave is manipulated by factors outside your control, whereas again most people (including humanistic psychologists) would feel that they freely choose to obtain the latest fashionable product.

    On the positive side, behaviourist accounts lend themselves to scientific proof because the variables can be operationalised, which means we could investigate one of the explanations to see if it was right. More importantly, the approach is very parsimonious and can be generalised to other aspects of Mark’s life, such as why he may desire other fashionable items other than a mobile telephone.
    You mention all applicable positive and negative points of the behaviourist model and explain them in a detailed fashion. 6 marks.

    (Original post by Surfing Hamster)
    (c) A behaviourist is likely to use an experiment as it makes it easy to control variables and demonstrate whether the explanation is right. To do this, you would work out a suitable hypothesis derived from your explanation. One hypothesis might be ‘participants’ desire to own a mobile telephone will increase when exposed to individuals being vicariously reinforced for owning one’. Each participant, taken from a quota sample, would be shown a videotape of a group of people in a social situation; one of their phones would ring and everyone would stare in amazement; consequently, the owner would receive direct praise. The videotape could be incorporated into a short film so the participants didn’t catch on and develop demand characteristics. This experiment would use a matched pairs design containing two conditions: one group would watch the videotape and the other wouldn’t; this type of grouping would ensure the two groups were similar in age, status and gender. Later, participants in both groups would be asked to rate their desire to own a mobile telephone – it would have to be a single-blind experiment so that participants would not exhibit demand characteristics. This would mean you must debrief the participants afterwards. You could then compare the average ratings of each group on the importance of owning a feature-rich mobile telephone with each other and determine what effect the film had on their behaviour.
    Your experiment is doable, and you have gone into a good level of detail with how you would conduct the experiment. However. Although you have mentioned that your groups will be the same age, etc. would this research be equally as applicable to someone who was, say 80? Make sure you cover your bases, but otherwise a very good attempt. 5 marks.

    (Original post by Surfing Hamster)
    (d) One of the strengths of the experimental approach is that you can demonstrate cause and effect so the experiment above would allow us to claim that association with prestige, status and admiration caused peoples’ desire to own such a fashionable item to heighten. However, this is such an artificial situation that it may not relate to real life, where many other factors would be involved.

    Using matched pairs is good because it controls for participants determining the aim of the study and adopting demand characteristics. This would overcome the problem that participants will artificially mark down the same score before and after the experiment; these factors, if not controlled properly, could threaten the validity of the findings.

    Generalising from an experiment is also problematic because of the sample of people used. It is hard to get a representative sample, especially when using matched pairs design as individual differences will always play a part in experiments like this (however extrinsically similar people may seem). So, reservations should be made about this when concluding the results of the experiment.

    There is also the issue of ethics to consider. Manipulating peoples’ behaviour as in this experiment is unethical, especially when it may influence them to purchase a product purely as a result; however, debriefings after the experiment should account for this and enable participants to see the real reason behind the study. Ideally, you should reverse this process by showing another videotape but with adverse reactions to the telephone (such as it being annoying due to it interrupting a social situation), but you cannot be sure how effective this would be.
    Be careful here. You should use more terminology, or you are shooting yourself in the foot. Remember terms like, "High experimental validity" and "Low ecological validity". However, you have mentioned many advantages and disadvantages, this answer would be worth 5 marks.

    I marked quite harshly! You got 5+6+6+5+5 = 27/30. Easily an A grade.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    can anyone help me out for question A in approaches.
    when i mention the behavioural model do i write about both
    classical condition/opereant conditioning and social learning theory.
    or should i only write about 1 of them
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ShadowStorm)
    I marked quite harshly! You got 5+6+6+5+5 = 27/30. Easily an A grade.
    Wow! Thanks ShadowStorm!! That was really useful (and a big confidence boost!).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sprite)
    can anyone help me out for question A in approaches.
    when i mention the behavioural model do i write about both
    classical condition/opereant conditioning and social learning theory.
    or should i only write about 1 of them
    For the first part of the question you can explain the main behaviourist principles of stimulus-response and classical and operant conditioning. Then move on to say that Social Learning Theory developed the idea of vicarious reinforcement where one could learn from observing another receiving positive (or negative) reinforcement.

    Hope this helps.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    reductionism....I seem to have lost all my notes on this topic... I think I understand the general gist though...do you reckon it'll be on the paper? Do we have to know the humanistic approach? my teacher was quite vague about the whole thing!
 
 
 

University open days

  1. University of Edinburgh
    All Departments Undergraduate
    Sat, 22 Sep '18
  2. University of Exeter
    Undergraduate Open Days - Penryn Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 22 Sep '18
  3. Loughborough University
    General Open Day Undergraduate
    Sat, 22 Sep '18
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?

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.