psychology

[confused_soul]

http://www.slideshare.net/Hasasu/suspect-lies-and-video-tapes

 

[confused_soul]

i have psychology tommorow ,had so little time to revise ,mostly concentrated on chemistry and biology
heres a site i use for some studies:
www.holah.karoo.net and
www.holah.co.uk

stick here i am posting my stuff along
stay motivated
we can do this InshAllah

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

So the 64 boys (aged 14-15) from a comprehensive school in Bristol, UK, they were sent to the laboratory in a group of 8. Each group came from the same house and the same class. So they knew each other very well.

Upon arrival, they were told the study was about 'visual judgements'. There were 2 experiments:

Experiment 1:
- They were shown 40 pictures of clusters of dots, and asked to estimate the number of dots in each picture.
- Then, they were told that some of them consistently overestimated, underestimated, accurate & inaccurate, and taken to separate cubicles and thus, divided into those groups.
- In fact, they were allocated randomly without their knowledge.
- A booklet of matrices were given to each and the task would consist of 'giving the others rewards and penalties using real money'.
- The boys wouldn't know the identity of identity of the individuals to whom they would be assigning these rewards/penalties since everyone would be given a code number. They couldn't give rewards to themselves.
- 1 point = 1/10 of a penny
- The boys were required to make 3 types of choices: in-group (matrix were for members of his own group), out-group (rewards and penalties for the other group) & intergroup (one row for his group, one row for the other group)
- Result: they were fair for in-group & out-group choice, BUT showed prejudice/discrimination for inter-group choice. Gave more money to members of his own group, and not to the other group.

 

[confused_soul]

http://www.experiment-resources.com/stanford-prison-experiment.html

 

[confused_soul]

thank u soooo much !
wat would be the evaluation of dis study !!!

 

[dman7000]

stick here i am posting my stuff along
stay motivated
we can do this InshAllah

thaanks!
we can so do this!
InshAllah

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

experiment 2:
- 12 paintings by Klee & Kandinsky.
- Boy asked to rate the paintings & 'supposedly' grouped to artist they preferred. Again, they were actually allocated randomly.
- But this time, experimenters manipulated the matrices in a way so they could investigate 3 things: Maximum in-joint profit (could gv largest reward to members of both groups), maximum in-group profit (choose largest reward for member of own group rgardless of reward to other group), maximum difference (largest possible difference in reward between the two groups).
- Boys ignored maximum joint & maximum profit.
- Boys tended to choose maximum difference (gv big reward to his group, small reward to other group)
- thus, prejudice & discrimination

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

thaanks!
we can so do this!
InshAllah

inshaAllah~

 

[confused_soul]

^^jazakAllah khair

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

i think as for evaluation, the most significant ones are: ecological validity (using matrices to give points? i mean... students dont do those in real life), ethical issues (deception, esp.), reductionism ('mere existence' reason behind p&d), sample bias (all schoolboys from same school, same house, same age, same class),

 

[confused_soul]

6) Freud.​

Developmental​

​

Aim:To report the findings of the treatment of a 5-year-old boy for his phobia of horses.

Participants:1 child, 'Little Hans'.
- 3 years old at the start of the study.

Method:Case Study.Qualitiative.
- Han's father was a Freud fan and hoped he could help his son.
- He sent letters to Freud of recorded behaviour from Hans.
- Freud would reply with his 'Interpretation'.

Results:
- Freud believed in something called the 'Oedipus Complex' in which he said that children pass through 5 psychosexual stages with the first 5 years of life.
- Oral Stage, Anal Stage, Phallic Stage, Latency Period, Genital Stage.
(Old Age Pensioners Like Gardening).

- Widdler: When he was 3 he developed an interest in his widdler (Penis), and also other people's. He saw that animals had big ones, including horses. He would often fantasize and dream about them.He also enjoyed excretion, which are indications of the Phallic Stage. At 3 years and ½ months his mother threatened to call the doctor and cut off his widdler if he persisted to play with it. He also found out that as his mother didn't have a penis, he believed that she had hers cut and the same will happen to him. This caused Castration Anxiety.
- Mother: As part of being in the Phallic Stage, Freud believed that children felt sexual desires to their opposite-sex parent. Therefore he believed that Hans was at this stage, but repressed these desires at the fear of being castrated by his father.
- Sister: Just after his mother threatened him, she gave birth to a baby girl. Hans developed a jealousy ofher, as he believed that not only is his mother being taken by his father, but now his new sister. He admitted to wishing that she’d drowned one time when he was watching his mother bath her. This then made him fear baths, as he believed that his mother might drown him.
- Father: Hans saw his father as a rival as he believes he was consuming his mother so admitted that he often wished his father dead. However he also loved his father at the same time, which created emotional conflict for Hans.
- Horses: Hans developed a phobia of horses for many reasons. He feared large penises after being threatened that his will be cut off, so therefore feared horses due to them having large penises. It was noted that this fear developed after having dreams of losing his mother. He also feared horses as he associated his fear of his father with them. This was due to them wearing blinkers which reminded him of his father's glasses, and black straps around their mouths which reminded him of his father's moustache. He dreamt about two giraffes in which Hans took a smaller one away and a larger one cried out. This linked to dreams of his mother being taken away and feared his father as he believed he was going to take his mother away, so the large giraffe represented his father and the smaller one represented his mother with Hans taking her back. It was also noted that the giraffe's long necks represented large penises. This fear continued until he was afraid to leave the house. Finally Freud noted that his fear declined after two more fantasies. One in which he's married to his mother with his own children and his father is the grandfather, and another in which a plumber removes his bottom and penis and replaces them with bigger ones.

Evaluation:

Strengths​

Weaknesses​

Qualitative Data: Very in-depth, gives real life opinions.​

Sample: 1 participant, not generalisable. Ethnocentric. Unrepresentative.​

Natural Setting: Wall all carried out in Han's home, making the stories more real.​

Social Desirability: The father was a fan of Freud so could have given Freud info that he thinks he wants to hear.​

Rich in Detail: More reliable/eliminates EV's as it gives detailed accounts into why he behaved in this way (i.e. All the factors that made him fear horses).​

As the Dad collected all the information of Little Hans then his opinion of Little Han's behaviour could be different to somebody else, therefore lacking EV.​

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

curious. where are you from?

 

[confused_soul]

guys am i the only one feeling motivated ?

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

<<exhausted already. i wna continue tmrw morning. hahah...

 

[confused_soul]

i had a nyc 4 hours sleep
so pretty fresh
listen to music along it ll help
or eat

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

eating now bt i dun think i can continue. i need to revise on schachter & singer, dematte, langlois & maguire my god so manyyyyyyyyyy

 

[confused_soul]

So the 64 boys (aged 14-15) from a comprehensive school in Bristol, UK, they were sent to the laboratory in a group of 8. Each group came from the same house and the same class. So they knew each other very well.

Upon arrival, they were told the study was about 'visual judgements'. There were 2 experiments:

Experiment 1:
- They were shown 40 pictures of clusters of dots, and asked to estimate the number of dots in each picture.
- Then, they were told that some of them consistently overestimated, underestimated, accurate & inaccurate, and taken to separate cubicles and thus, divided into those groups.
- In fact, they were allocated randomly without their knowledge.
- A booklet of matrices were given to each and the task would consist of 'giving the others rewards and penalties using real money'.
- The boys wouldn't know the identity of identity of the individuals to whom they would be assigning these rewards/penalties since everyone would be given a code number. They couldn't give rewards to themselves.
- 1 point = 1/10 of a penny
- The boys were required to make 3 types of choices: in-group (matrix were for members of his own group), out-group (rewards and penalties for the other group) & intergroup (one row for his group, one row for the other group)
- Result: they were fair for in-group & out-group choice, BUT showed prejudice/discrimination for inter-group choice. Gave more money to members of his own group, and not to the other group.

please explain what is meant by inter group and how r dey being fair to in group n out group

 

[confused_soul]

dont wry u can do it

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

i think the matrices are self explanatory. do you hv them?

 

[Akhmal Aiman]

intergroup is both your group and the other group.