What is the learning theory?
-The idea that all behaviours are aquired using principles of CONDITIONS.
What are the two conditions?
1)CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
2)OPERTANT CONDITIONING
What is CLASSICAL CONDITIONING?
-Classical condition is learning by association
-->Ivan Pavlov, and his dogs circa 1905
-Terminology of Classical Conditioning (continued)
Conditioned Stimulus (CS): any stimulus that will, after association with an UCS, cause a conditioned response (CR) when present to a subject by itself
Conditioned Response (CR): any response that occurs upon the presentation of the CS
What is OPERANT CONDITIONING?
Consequences to behavior can be:
nothing happens: extinction
something happens
the “something” can be pleasant
the “something” can be aversive
Consequences include positive and negative reinforcement, time out, and punishment.
-DOLLARD AND MILLER
What was HARLOW AND HARLOWS STUDY?
-Discovered using infant Rhesus monkeys that FOOD ALONE isnt sufficient enough for the formation of attachments.
-->The child needs CONTACT and RESPONSIVE CARE GIVERS
How to evaluate the Learning theory?
-LEARNING THEORY: Infants will be attached to those that offer best PLEASURE, DRIVE REDUCTION.
-Against this: SCHAFFER AND EMERSON: 39% of attachments werent to those who fed/bathed the infant
-HARLOW AND HARLOW: NOT food alone, ALSO we can not generalise from Rhesus monkeys
-BEHAVIOURISM: over-simpifies the complexity of attachements.
What was Bowlbys theory about attachments and SURVIVAL?
-Attachemnts are vital for SURVIAL, PROTECTION, FEEDING
-Infants have an innate tendency to form these bonds
-Attachments: a BIOLOGICAL PROCESS which must take place in a CRITICAL PERIOD
-Attachments help with future development (monotrophy/continuity process)
What is the CRITICAL PERIOD?
Attachments are a biological process
-->if attachments arent formed by 2 1/2, the bond WILL NOT FORM
What is the CONTINUITY PROCESS?
-Relationships with one special attachment (monotrophy) provides an infant with an INTERNAL WORKING MODEL.
-->SECURE CHILDREN: POSITIVE IWM: caregiver sensitivity
-->AVOIDANT CHILDREN: NEGATIVE IWM: rejecting caregiver
-->AMIVALENT CHILDREN: NEGATIVE/EXAGGERATED IWM: inconsistent caregiver
Evaluation of Bowlbys attachment theory?
1)Attachment is INNATE we are all born with this drive
2)Bonds are formed with those that respond sensitively
3)Must occur during the critical period of 2 1/2 years
4)We have to have a special bond (monotrophy)
5)This leads to an INTERNAL WORKING MODEL AND THE CONTINUITY PROCESS
--->It had a large impact on childcare
--->It encouraged research
--->It doesnt show why some children can cope with POOR ATTACHMENT EXPERIENCES.
How does LORENZ study support this?
-Konrad Lorenz studied the behaviour of geese (tend to imprint the first thing that they see)
-->2 groups: 1) Gesse stay with mother 2)Geese placed in incubator
-->GROUP 2: Followed Lorenz as he was the first thing they saw
--->This shows that young animals: likely to follow mother to increase surival rates
--->Characteristics that promote reproduction are selected.
Monday, 31 March 2008
Psychology: Bowlbys theory of Attachments.
What was Bowlbys theory of attachments?
-Infants need ONE SPECIAL ATTACHMENT, which is qualitatively different from their others.
-MONOTROPHY: RAISED BY ONE PERSON
-->Required for a INTERNAL WORKING MODEL and EMOTIAL MATURITY
-->IWM: enables indivdual to PREDICT, CONTROL and MANIPULATE their environments, BASIS of other relationships
What does THOMAS feel about Bowlbys attachment theory?
-Thomas claims that infants need MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS, as various relationships cater for diffrent needs of the child.
--->CARIBBEAN CULTURE: various/multiple attachments
Is there a middle ground between Bowlby (monotrophy) and Thomas (multiple attachments)?
-SCHAFFER AND EMERSON: although children form various realtionships there will always be one PRIMARY ATTACHMENT.
-Infants need ONE SPECIAL ATTACHMENT, which is qualitatively different from their others.
-MONOTROPHY: RAISED BY ONE PERSON
-->Required for a INTERNAL WORKING MODEL and EMOTIAL MATURITY
-->IWM: enables indivdual to PREDICT, CONTROL and MANIPULATE their environments, BASIS of other relationships
What does THOMAS feel about Bowlbys attachment theory?
-Thomas claims that infants need MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS, as various relationships cater for diffrent needs of the child.
--->CARIBBEAN CULTURE: various/multiple attachments
Is there a middle ground between Bowlby (monotrophy) and Thomas (multiple attachments)?
-SCHAFFER AND EMERSON: although children form various realtionships there will always be one PRIMARY ATTACHMENT.
Psychology: Cross Cultural Differences, attachments.
What is a culture?
-The BELIEFS/CUSTOMS that a group of people share
What is a subculture?
-Group within society that shares practices with their CULTURE yet has SOME SPECIAL DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS within this.
What did GROSSMAN AND GROSSMAN DISCOVER?
-German infants more INSECURELY ATTACHED, German culture of DISTANCE.
-->this doesnt mean they are INSECURELY ATTACHED
What did KROONENBURG and IJENDOORN discover?
-They carried out 32 studies in 8 different countries
-Their META-ANALYSIS showed consistency: same INTERACTIONS due to MEDIA INFULENCE
Error with Cross cultural comparions?
-SSR may not mean the same thing in different countries/cultures-->lacks validity
-We arent aware about HOW MANY INFANTS WERE USED in the study, may be small sample size.
STUDY OF JAPANESE CHILDREN BY TAKAHASHI.
Aim: To see whether the SSC was appropriate for Japanese children, testing whether SSC is a valid procedure for cultures other than its original condition.
Procedure:
-60 Middle class Japanese infant/mothers, Strange situation task took place.
Findings:
-68% were TYPE B: SECURELY ATTACHED
-0% were TYPE A: AVOIDANT INSECURE
-32% were TYPE C:RESISTANT INSECURE
-ALSO: 90% of left alone conditions were terminated as infants became disturbed
Conclusion:
1)Cross-cultural differences may be due to the fact that JAPANESE CHILDREN ARE CLOSER TO THEIR PARENTS. SSC was more stressful in this study.
2)Lack of AVOIDANT INSECURE may be due to the fact that the Japanese reguard this as rude behaviour
3)SSR doesnt mean the same thing for Japanese children as it does for american
Criticism:
-Research using children must be careful, e.g. psychological harm caused to the child.
-Carried out on Middle class not representative culture bias, but REPRESENTS CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
-TAKAHASHI: SENSITIVITY: stopped study with distressed children
--->LACK OF SENSITIVITY: the experiment didnt stop, he carried on overall study.
-The BELIEFS/CUSTOMS that a group of people share
What is a subculture?
-Group within society that shares practices with their CULTURE yet has SOME SPECIAL DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS within this.
What did GROSSMAN AND GROSSMAN DISCOVER?
-German infants more INSECURELY ATTACHED, German culture of DISTANCE.
-->this doesnt mean they are INSECURELY ATTACHED
What did KROONENBURG and IJENDOORN discover?
-They carried out 32 studies in 8 different countries
-Their META-ANALYSIS showed consistency: same INTERACTIONS due to MEDIA INFULENCE
Error with Cross cultural comparions?
-SSR may not mean the same thing in different countries/cultures-->lacks validity
-We arent aware about HOW MANY INFANTS WERE USED in the study, may be small sample size.
STUDY OF JAPANESE CHILDREN BY TAKAHASHI.
Aim: To see whether the SSC was appropriate for Japanese children, testing whether SSC is a valid procedure for cultures other than its original condition.
Procedure:
-60 Middle class Japanese infant/mothers, Strange situation task took place.
Findings:
-68% were TYPE B: SECURELY ATTACHED
-0% were TYPE A: AVOIDANT INSECURE
-32% were TYPE C:RESISTANT INSECURE
-ALSO: 90% of left alone conditions were terminated as infants became disturbed
Conclusion:
1)Cross-cultural differences may be due to the fact that JAPANESE CHILDREN ARE CLOSER TO THEIR PARENTS. SSC was more stressful in this study.
2)Lack of AVOIDANT INSECURE may be due to the fact that the Japanese reguard this as rude behaviour
3)SSR doesnt mean the same thing for Japanese children as it does for american
Criticism:
-Research using children must be careful, e.g. psychological harm caused to the child.
-Carried out on Middle class not representative culture bias, but REPRESENTS CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
-TAKAHASHI: SENSITIVITY: stopped study with distressed children
--->LACK OF SENSITIVITY: the experiment didnt stop, he carried on overall study.
Psychology: Secure and Insecure Attachments
Why would one measure attachments?
In order to see how particular attachment types affect later development.
Is the Strange Situation reliable?
-Development of children often took place at around the same time in various cases.
Is the StrangeSituation not reliable?
-Attachments could MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS to different people e.g. SECURELY ATTACHED TO MOTHER BUT NOT FATHER.
--->Thus SSR evaluates particular relationships
What did VAN IJZENDOORN state?
-Children have relationships of different qualities- wouldnt it be better to evaluate ALL RELATIONSHIPS and gain an AVERAGE.
--->SS is valid but needs to look at more than one relationship
What are the causes of attachments?
1)AINSWORTH ET AL: CAREGIVER SENSITIVITY: Schaffer and Emerson
2)KAGAN: TEMPERAMENT HYPOTHESIS: innate characteristics of the child.
In order to see how particular attachment types affect later development.
Is the Strange Situation reliable?
-Development of children often took place at around the same time in various cases.
Is the StrangeSituation not reliable?
-Attachments could MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS to different people e.g. SECURELY ATTACHED TO MOTHER BUT NOT FATHER.
--->Thus SSR evaluates particular relationships
What did VAN IJZENDOORN state?
-Children have relationships of different qualities- wouldnt it be better to evaluate ALL RELATIONSHIPS and gain an AVERAGE.
--->SS is valid but needs to look at more than one relationship
What are the causes of attachments?
1)AINSWORTH ET AL: CAREGIVER SENSITIVITY: Schaffer and Emerson
2)KAGAN: TEMPERAMENT HYPOTHESIS: innate characteristics of the child.
Psychology: Individual Differences with Attachments
-How does one test attachments?
-By evaluating the QUALITY OF ATTACHMENTS, individual differences can be seen.
--->Schaffer and Emerson: some infants STRONGLY ATTACHED
-How was this tested?
-MARY AINSWORTH: Produced a study into attachment quality: STRANGE SITUATION.
Aim: To find an adequate measure of attachment quality by subjecting an infant to a situation of MINOR STRESS
-->1) comfort seeking 2)proximity: measures of quality.
Procedures: 100 middle class AMERICAN infants and their mothers
-Observation of infants/mothers undertaking tasks STRANGE SITUATION
-Notes were taken of:
1)Separation anxiety
2)Willingness to explore
3)Stranger anxiety
4)Reunion behaviour
Findings: AINSWORTH AND BELL: placed children in 3 types
TYPE B: SECURELY ATTACHED: 66%- EXPLORED room, UPSET upon separation, HAPPY upon arrival, AVOIDED stranger: SENSITIVE MOTHER
TYPE A: AVOIDANT INSECURE: 22%- DIDNT EXPLORE WELL, AVOIDED MOTHER absence/arrival, AVOIDANT towards stranger: SOMETIMES IGNORED CHILD
TYPE C: RESISTANT INSECURE: 12%- DISTRESSED upon mothers leave, REJECTED MOTHER in her arrival, AMBIVALENT towards stranger: MOTHER SOMETIMES AMBIVALENT
CRITICISMS: Hard to generalize, middle class americans: CULTURE BIAS
-->MAIN AND CASSIDY: TYPE D: INCONSISTENT CHILDREN: CONFUSED, STERETOYPICAL BEHAVIOUR:: ROCKING.
-By evaluating the QUALITY OF ATTACHMENTS, individual differences can be seen.
--->Schaffer and Emerson: some infants STRONGLY ATTACHED
-How was this tested?
-MARY AINSWORTH: Produced a study into attachment quality: STRANGE SITUATION.
Aim: To find an adequate measure of attachment quality by subjecting an infant to a situation of MINOR STRESS
-->1) comfort seeking 2)proximity: measures of quality.
Procedures: 100 middle class AMERICAN infants and their mothers
-Observation of infants/mothers undertaking tasks STRANGE SITUATION
-Notes were taken of:
1)Separation anxiety
2)Willingness to explore
3)Stranger anxiety
4)Reunion behaviour
Findings: AINSWORTH AND BELL: placed children in 3 types
TYPE B: SECURELY ATTACHED: 66%- EXPLORED room, UPSET upon separation, HAPPY upon arrival, AVOIDED stranger: SENSITIVE MOTHER
TYPE A: AVOIDANT INSECURE: 22%- DIDNT EXPLORE WELL, AVOIDED MOTHER absence/arrival, AVOIDANT towards stranger: SOMETIMES IGNORED CHILD
TYPE C: RESISTANT INSECURE: 12%- DISTRESSED upon mothers leave, REJECTED MOTHER in her arrival, AMBIVALENT towards stranger: MOTHER SOMETIMES AMBIVALENT
CRITICISMS: Hard to generalize, middle class americans: CULTURE BIAS
-->MAIN AND CASSIDY: TYPE D: INCONSISTENT CHILDREN: CONFUSED, STERETOYPICAL BEHAVIOUR:: ROCKING.
Psychology: Development of Attachments
What is an attachment?
-Attachment is a stong, emotional reciprocal bond between 2 people.
--->the basis of emotional development
What were Maccobys 4 characteristics?
1)Seeking proximity
2)Upset upon separation
3)Happiness upon reunion
4)General behaviour toward caregiver
What was SCHAFFER and EMERSONS study?
Aim: They wanted to perform a study into the developments of attachments
--> Age children were
-->Who these attachments were to
-->How strong these attachments were
Procedure:
- Studied 60 infants from working class GLASGOW
- Every 4 weeks until aged one
-->MEASURES USED:
1)Separation anxiety: distress shown when child is separated from caregiver
2)Stranger anxiety: distress shown when child is in the presence of a stranger
Findings:
1)HALF of children showed SPECIFIC ATTACHMENTS between 6-8 MONTHS. FOLLOWED by STRANGER ANXIETY around a month after
2)NOT LONG after one attchment was made did the others follow, BY 18 MONTHS infant had more than one attachment
3)STRENGHT OF ATTACHMENT was strongest a MONTH after attachment behaviour was seen
--->INTENSLY ATTACHED CHILDREN: had highly responsive caregivers
--->WEAKLY ATTACHED CHILDREN: had unresponsive caregivers
4)In 39% of cases the individual that fed, bathed the infant was not their primary attchment
JOHN BOWLBY: 4 PHASE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENTS
AGE: 0-2 MONTHS: PRE-ATTACHMENTS:
-->Infants show similar response to ANIMATE/INANIMATE OBJECTS. Towards end of stage the infant prefers social stimuli
AGE: 2-6 MONTHS: ATTACHMENT IN THE MAKING:
-->Infants become MORE SOCIABLE, prefer HUMAN COMPANY.
AGE: AROUND 6 MONTHS: SPECIFIC ATTACHMENTS:
-->Infants show specific type of protest when with a particular individual. STRANGER ANXIETY BEGINS around this time.
AGE: 2 YEARS: GOAL CORRECTED PARTNERSHIPS:
-->Relationship becomes more TWO SIDED. Those in relationship can ADJUST their behaviour to the NEEDS OF THE OTHER.
The evaluation of Bowlby?
- In this day and age Bowlbys theory may not be as accurate, some children are MORE SOCIABLE AT AN EARLIER AGE
-Appearance of SEPARATION ANXIETY: children lose interest in things that disappear until they form object permanence
What is so significant about physical development?
-Shorty after primary attachment is formed the DEVELOPMENT OF MOBILITY follows.
-AINSWORTH: Ugandan babies showed STRANGER ANXIETY at 6 MONTHS and their MOBILITY WAS ADVANCED.
What conclusion can be made?
-There is evidence to SUPPORT BOWLBY: certain attachment types OCCUR AROUND 6 MONTHS (attchment were STRANGER ANXIETY IS EXPERIENCED)
-There is evidence AGAINST BOWLBY: infants are more sociable nowadays than previously.
-Attachment is a stong, emotional reciprocal bond between 2 people.
--->the basis of emotional development
What were Maccobys 4 characteristics?
1)Seeking proximity
2)Upset upon separation
3)Happiness upon reunion
4)General behaviour toward caregiver
What was SCHAFFER and EMERSONS study?
Aim: They wanted to perform a study into the developments of attachments
--> Age children were
-->Who these attachments were to
-->How strong these attachments were
Procedure:
- Studied 60 infants from working class GLASGOW
- Every 4 weeks until aged one
-->MEASURES USED:
1)Separation anxiety: distress shown when child is separated from caregiver
2)Stranger anxiety: distress shown when child is in the presence of a stranger
Findings:
1)HALF of children showed SPECIFIC ATTACHMENTS between 6-8 MONTHS. FOLLOWED by STRANGER ANXIETY around a month after
2)NOT LONG after one attchment was made did the others follow, BY 18 MONTHS infant had more than one attachment
3)STRENGHT OF ATTACHMENT was strongest a MONTH after attachment behaviour was seen
--->INTENSLY ATTACHED CHILDREN: had highly responsive caregivers
--->WEAKLY ATTACHED CHILDREN: had unresponsive caregivers
4)In 39% of cases the individual that fed, bathed the infant was not their primary attchment
JOHN BOWLBY: 4 PHASE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENTS
AGE: 0-2 MONTHS: PRE-ATTACHMENTS:
-->Infants show similar response to ANIMATE/INANIMATE OBJECTS. Towards end of stage the infant prefers social stimuli
AGE: 2-6 MONTHS: ATTACHMENT IN THE MAKING:
-->Infants become MORE SOCIABLE, prefer HUMAN COMPANY.
AGE: AROUND 6 MONTHS: SPECIFIC ATTACHMENTS:
-->Infants show specific type of protest when with a particular individual. STRANGER ANXIETY BEGINS around this time.
AGE: 2 YEARS: GOAL CORRECTED PARTNERSHIPS:
-->Relationship becomes more TWO SIDED. Those in relationship can ADJUST their behaviour to the NEEDS OF THE OTHER.
The evaluation of Bowlby?
- In this day and age Bowlbys theory may not be as accurate, some children are MORE SOCIABLE AT AN EARLIER AGE
-Appearance of SEPARATION ANXIETY: children lose interest in things that disappear until they form object permanence
What is so significant about physical development?
-Shorty after primary attachment is formed the DEVELOPMENT OF MOBILITY follows.
-AINSWORTH: Ugandan babies showed STRANGER ANXIETY at 6 MONTHS and their MOBILITY WAS ADVANCED.
What conclusion can be made?
-There is evidence to SUPPORT BOWLBY: certain attachment types OCCUR AROUND 6 MONTHS (attchment were STRANGER ANXIETY IS EXPERIENCED)
-There is evidence AGAINST BOWLBY: infants are more sociable nowadays than previously.
Wednesday, 26 March 2008
Psychology: Assessing and Improving Validity
What is validity?
-Validity: the extent to which something measures what it sets out to measure
What is internal validity?
-The extent to which research findings are due to the mechanisms suggested
What is external validity?
-The extent to which results can be generalised to settings beyond those of the study context
1)Population validity: extent to which research findings can be generalised to other groups of people
2)Ecological validity: extent to which results can be generalised to situations outside those of the research settings
-Validity: the extent to which something measures what it sets out to measure
What is internal validity?
-The extent to which research findings are due to the mechanisms suggested
What is external validity?
-The extent to which results can be generalised to settings beyond those of the study context
1)Population validity: extent to which research findings can be generalised to other groups of people
2)Ecological validity: extent to which results can be generalised to situations outside those of the research settings
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)