Summary
Psychology AQA Paper 3 Summary Notes
- Course
- Institution
Psychology AQA Paper 3 Summary Notes
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
ellyholmes
Reviews received
Content preview
Psychology Paper 3 Quick NotesIssues and debates
Gender bias
Bias undermines psychology’s claims to universality.
Alpha-biased research that exaggerates gender differences. Freud psychosexual stages – girl’s eventual
identification with same sex parent is weaker, her superego is weaker, women are morally inferior to men.
Beta-biased – ignores differences. Fight or flight research favoured male animals. Due to stress increasing
oxytocin production women show preference for tend and befriend.
Consequences of androcentrism. Women’s behaviour often misunderstood and pathologized.
Differences suggested to be hardwired. Data published as fits with stereotypes.
Does not mean gender difference studies avoided. Some stereotypes have biological truth.
Women underrepresented in departments. Research more likely to be conducted by men.
Research into gender bias funded less often and published in less prestigious journals.
Misleading assumption of female behaviour. Embrace effects as crucial part of research.
Cultural bias
Henrich reviewed hundreds of studies and found 68% participants from US, 96% from industrial nations.
WEIRD – Westernised, Educated people from Industrialised, Rich Democracies. Those not represented seen as
abnormal. Ethnocentrism – cultural bias e.g., strange situation. Imposed etic.
Etic – behaviour from outside given culture described behaviours as universal. Emic – inside a culture identifies
behaviour specific to a culture.
Most influential studies culturally biased. (Milgram, Asch). Increased globalisation, distinctions irrelevant.
14/15 studies comparing US to Japan found no difference.
Cultural psychology aims to avoid ethnocentric assumptions by taking an emic approach.
Prejudices. Intelligence test on 1.75m army recruits. Ethnocentric Q led to racist discourse about genetic
inferiority of ethnic groups.
Cross-cultural research challenges dominant individualist views. Evidence of universal behaviours.
Free will and determinism
Free will suggests human beings are self-determining and free to choose their own thoughts. Humanistic.
Determinism proposes that free will has no place in explaining behaviour. Hard, soft, biological, environmental,
psychic. Basic principles of science that every event has a cause which can be explained.
Free will practicality. Fatalism leads to greater risk of depression. Free will liberating for some.
Brain scan support determinism. Flick wrist randomly. Unconscious brain activity ½ second before decision.
Decision took time to reach consciousness but there was still decision to move.
Offenders held responsible for their action. Determinism lacks real-world argument.
Deterministic approaches helped establish psych as a science.
Nature-nurture
Any behaviour arises from combination of both. Bowlby – baby’s attachment determined by warmth and
continuity of love but also innate personality. Interactionist approach.
Diathesis-stress model behaviour caused by biological vulnerability but triggered by environment.
Epigenetics – change in genetic activity due to interaction environment. Smoking.
Empiricists argue mind is blank slate at birth. Prenatal and postnatal factors.
Concordance provides estimate of heritability. 0.1 no contribution. 1.0 genes only contribution.
Adoptive children more similar to adoptive parents. Genetic influence 41% aggression.
Epigenetics. Dutch famine. Pregnant women babies low birth weight. 2x likely schizophrenia.
Real-world. OCD high heritability. 0.76. Can inform genetic counselling.
Nativists – anatomy destiny. Determinist stance – eugenic policies. Empiricists suggest behaviour can be
changed – state control.
Holism and reductionism
Holism – attempts to subdivide behaviour inappropriate. Humanistic psychologists.
Reductionism seeks to analyse behaviour by breaking it down. Based on scientific principle parsimony.
Biological reductionism, environmental reductionism.
Lacks practicality. Holistic accounts complex. Difficult to prioritise treatment.
Reductionism forms scientific approach. Variables operationalised, objective, reliable. Oversimplified.
, Aspects of behaviour often cannot be reduced as emerge in group context. SPE.
Reductionist, we are thinking machines. Neuroscientist struggle to explain subjective experiences.
Ideographic and nomothetic
Ideographic – study individuals, detailed info leads to greater understanding. Case studies, qualitative.
Nomothetic – should study large varied groups to make generalisations of what is typical. Hypotheses, samples
assessed, numerical data. Objective – laws of behaviour can be established. ideographic believes not possible.
Ideographic contributes to nomothetic. Sheds light on general laws. Methods least scientific and rely on
subjective interpretations.
Both fit with aims of science. Modern qualitative researchers careful to reflect on own biases.
Nomothetic leads to loss of understanding of individual. Subjective may be useful in treatments.
Two approaches distinct. Each appropriate for different research aims.
Ethical implications
Concerns consequences of research. Some areas may have greater social sensitivity.
Sieber and Stanley warn of way research Q phrased and investigated. E.g., research into relationships guilt of
heterosexual bias. Should consider in advance how findings may be used as it may impact how data collected.
Findings may give scientific credence to existing prejudices. Media tend to highlight sensitive info.
Benefits for groups studied. 1973 following Kinsey report that homosexuality typical behaviour, removed from
DSM-1. Research into genetic basis criminality found criminal genes. Convicted? Excused?
Govts. look to research when developing policies. Preferrable to base upon scientific research.
Poor research design erroneous findings with enduring effects. 11+.
Ethical committees approved 95% non-sensitive proposals, only 50% sensitive proposals.
Relationships
Evolutionary explanations for partner preferences
Darwin – concept of sexual selection concerns characteristics to aid reproduction. Anisogamy refers to
differences between male and female sex cells. Sperm (small, mobile, low energy, constant), eggs opposite.
Anisogamy gives way to sexual selection. Inter-sexual between the sexes. Females make greater investments,
more to lose. Female mating strategy to select genetically fit partner with resources. Sexy son’s hypothesis.
Intra-sexual within sex. Male strategy. Competition to be selected. Winner reproduces and characteristics that
won passed on. Gives rise to dimorphism.
Supports female choosiness. ‘would you go to bed with me?’ 75% males yes, no females. Simplistic.
10,000 in 33 countries. F greater value on resource-related characteristics. M value looks and youth.
Overlook cultural and social factors. F don’t need M to provide anymore. Limited explanation.
Homo relationships not assessing genetic fitness. Preferences found to differ just as het.
Self-disclosure
Revealing personal info about yourself. Can strengthen romantic bond. Altman and Taylor social penetration
theory. Reciprocal exchange of info signals trust. Penetrate deeper into other life. Breadth and depth.
Described as onion. Depenetration describes how partners self-disclose less when disengage. Reis and Shaver
relationship must have reciprocity to develop.
Het couples found strong correlation between satisfaction and self-disclosure. Closer when take turns.
Correlation not cause. Third variable?
Improved communication. 57% homo said honest disclosure way maintaining relationship.
Cultural bias. US disclose more sexual thoughts than China. Satisfaction the same.
Disclosure not always save relationship. Breakdown partners may self-disclose more.
Physical attractiveness
Evolutionary Shackelford and Larsen people with symmetrical faces more attractive, genetic fitness. Babyface.
Halo effect, preconceived ideas about personality of attractive people. Self-fulfilling prophecy.
Matching hypothesis (Walster and Walster) look for partners who are similar int terms of physical
attractiveness. ‘Computer dance’. Most liked were most physically attractive rather than similar. Berscheid
replicated but allowed own selection – tended to choose partner who matched them.
Physically attractive rated more politically knowledgeable. Danger to democracy.
Women with certain features rated attractive by multiple races of men.
Online daters sought people more physically attractive than them. Diff when choosing romantic partners.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller ellyholmes. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.87. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
67866 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now