Research Methods AQA psychology A revision

development gap revision mind maps

relationships aqa a2 psychology

RELATIONSHIPS

Formation

Maintenance                    Breakdown  Reward / Need satisfaction theory – Byrne and clone Attraction through reward and punishment = operant conditioning

·         Behaviourist theory of relationship formation motivated to seek rewarding stimuli. What we find rewarding reflects our unmet needs

·         Rewarding stimuli produces positive feelings. Operant conditioning = repeat behaviours for outcome

·         More likely to meet people of you’re in a good mood. Neutral stimulus can become positively valued due to association

Positive reinforcement = fun company, family, reflects unmet needs

Negative reinforcement = removal of stress if you are upset and the stress is removed through support

Similarity – Byrne clore and Smeaton

Berscheild and reis = more likely to be attracted to people who have similar personality traits

Capsi and herbener = married couples with similar personalities tend to be happier

Attitude alignment occurs when partners disagree they modify their attitudes to become similar

A02 – Rosenbaum suggests dissimilarity is more important than similarity in relationship formation.

Social exchange theory – Tribaut and Kelly

All social behaviour is a series of exchanges that individuals use to maximise rewards and minimise costs. People exchange resources with expectation that they will earn profit.

Profit and loss = rewards could be being cared for, companionship or sex. Costs are effort, financial investment and time wasted.

Comparison level = Tibaut and Kelly proposed that we develop a comparison level this is a result of our previous experiences

If the potential profit in a new relationship exceeds our comparison level it will be judged as worthwhile. Comparison level of alternatives = person weighs up potential increase in rewards from a different partner minus costs.

A02

Profit and loss = Rusbult and Martz = when investments are high and alternatives are low, this could still be considered a profit situation and a woman might choose to remain in such an abusive relationship

Comparison level = Support can be found in looking at how people in a relationship deal with potential alternatives – can deal with them by reducing potential threats

Simpson et al = rated alternatives and people in a relationship gave lower ratings

Social exchange theory has been criticised for focusing too much on individuals perspective and ignoring social aspects of relationships eg communication. The theory has a selfish nature and it generalises individualist cultures.

Maintenance of romantic relationships

Equity theory – Walser et al

Inequality and distress = in social exchange theory all behaviour is a series of exchanges that minimise attempting to maximise rewards and risk.

Equity theory is an extension of the underlying belief assuming people strive to achieve fairness in a relationship. People will feel distressed if they feel the relationship is unfair.

In equity theory any kind of inequality has the potential to cause distress. The same is true for those who receive a great deal and give little in return. Inequitable relationship leads to dissatisfaction, the greater the perceived inequality the greater the dissatisfaction.

Ratio of inputs and outputs = equity does not necessarily mean equality. What is considered fair in terms of input and output is a subjective opinion. This is explained in terms of a person’s perceived ratio of inputs and a subjective assessment of relative outputs.

Equitable relationship = partners benefits minus costs = their partners benefits less their costs

A02

 Exchange and communal relationships

Clarke and Mills disagreed with the claim that all relationships are based on economics. They distinguished between exchange relationships and communal relationships. Exchange involves keeping track of costs and rewards but communal are governed by desire to respond to needs.

This disagrees with social exchange / equity theory and argues things will balance out in long run

BREAKDOWN OF RELATIONSHIPS

Duck:

·         Lack of skills – lack interpersonal skills, lack of social skills, others perceive them as not interesting

·         Lack of stimulation – in social exchange theory people look for rewards lack of stimulation could be boredom

·         Maintenance difficulties – can have a strain if don’t see each other e.g. long distance relationship

A01 Sexual selection – evolutionary

To enhance sexually reproducing species males are more brightly coloured to attract females this can be seen in the design of a peacock.

Intra sexual selection = mate competition. Members of one sex usually male compete with each other to access members of the other sex. The winner (victor) is able to mate and so sex contents passed onto next generation.

Intersexual selection = mate choice form of selection involves preferences of one sex. Men seek sex earlier in relationship

Short term mating preferences = men lower standards

Long term mate preferences = invest heavily poor mate choice would result in loss of valuable resources. Females attracted to physical protection. Females can only have one child a year.

Parental investment in relationships

Males can opt out of parental investment in a way that females can’t. Parental investment theory = sex that males larger investment will be more sexually discriminating. The sex that makes a smaller investment is competing for access to higher investing sex

Females invest more in offspring = more discriminating in choice of partner and males compete with other males for access to higher investing females

Parental investment = anything that parents put into children such as money, time, resources, these increase chances of survival at the expense that parents can’t invest in any other offspring. Parental investment may also be time spent protecting young and risks taken to protect them.

Male attitudes to parenting might be shaped using evolutionary explanations of parental investment. Cuckoldry = investing resources in a child which is not your own. Infidelity = cheating on your partner.

A01

Influence of childhood on adult relationships

Attachment

What we experience as romantic love in adulthood is a mixture of 3 behavioural systems acquired in infancy = attachment, care giving and sexuality systems. Attachment is related to an internal working model by bowlby, the model can lead to attachment disorders.

Child abuse

Physical abuse in childhood can lead to depression and anxiety. Sexual abuse has been associated with psychological impairment in adulthood. It could also affect trust and isolation from others.

Interaction with peers

Childhood friendships

Children learn from experiences with other children. The way a child thinks about themselves is determined by specific experiences which are internalised. Friendships are training grounds for adult relationships.

Adolescent relationships

Attachment shifts from parents to peers. Romantic relationships redirect intense interpersonal energy towards a romantic partner. Relationships allow emotional and physical intimacy. Dating in adolescent is advantageous can also become maladaptive.

A02

Support parental relationships

Frayley meta analysis = there is a relationship between attachment style and later adult relationships. They found correlations from 10 to 50, one reason for low correlation is because insecure anxious attachment is more unstable.

Childhood abuse

Berenson and Anderson support the claim abused children have a difficult time developing adult relationships. Women who had been abused in childhood displayed negative reactions towards another person but only with people who reminded them of their abusive parents. = Process could lead to individuals using inappropriately learned behaviours.

aggression a2 psychology AQA

AGGRESSION

Bandera and Walters believed that aggression could not be explained using traditional learning theory.

SLT suggests we learn by observing others. Our biological makeup creates potential for aggression, the actual expression of aggression is learned.

Observation = learn aggressive responses through observation. We watch behaviours of our role models then imitate this behaviour. Whereas skinners operant conditioning claims that children take place through direct reinforcement.

A01

·         Mental representation = Bandura claimed that in order for social learning to take place a child must form a mental representation of events in social situations. A child must represent the rewards and punishments for aggressive behaviour in terms of expectancies of future outcomes. Appropriate behaviours arise as the child displays learned behaviours.

Production of behaviour=

·         Maintenance through direct experience if a child is rewarded for a behaviour they are likely to repeat it. A child who has a history of successfully bullying other children will come to attach value to aggression.

·         Self efficiency expectancies In addition to forming expectancies of the likely outcomes of aggression, children develop confidence in their ability to carry out aggressive actions. If the behaviour has been bad in the past they have less confidence to use aggression.

DEINDIVIDUATION (when you lose your identity as part of a crowd)

Deindividuation is a combination of anonymity, suggestibility and contagion. The theory was based on Gustave le bon’s 1895 crowd theory. It explains how an individual can be transformed when they were part of a crowd.  The combination of anonymity, suggestibility and contagion form a collective mind that takes possession of the individual. The individual looses self control and acts against social norms. 

Deindividuation is a psychological state characterised by lower self evaluation. It is aroused when a person joins a large group. If you are part of a group you feel a sense of shared responsibility. If you have a mask or are anonymous, you may not evaluate your actions as you know you won’t be judged.

Institutional Aggression

Importation model

·         Interpersonal factors Irwin and Cressey = prisoners bring their own personal social histories with them into prison; this influences adaption to prison environments.  Prisoners are not blank slates. Many of the normative systems developed would be imported with them into prison.

·         Gang membership = gang membership is related to violence members of street gangs offend at higher levels

·         Situational Factors =deprivation model this model argues that prisoner or patent aggression is the product of stressful or oppressive conditions. This could be overcrowding and how it increases fear and frustration.

·         Pains of imprisonment Skyes described deprivations that imitate experience within prison which could be linked to an increase in violence. These included loss of liberty, loss of autonomy, and loss of security.

The importation model argues that the reason why aggression exists is because people bring past aggression with them into prison. Irwin and Cressy = prisoners do not enter as blank slates.

The deprivation model argues prison aggression is the result of oppressive and stressful conditions inside such as overcrowding. The loss of freedom and lack of opportunity leads to aggression and frustration.

Institutional aggression: Genocide

Institution may refer to a whole section of society defined by ethnicity, religion etc

Violence may occur when institution relationships with another is characterised by hatred and hostility.

Dehumanisation = may make humans feel worthless and not worthy of moral consideration

Obedience to authority = milgram believed holocaust was a result of situational pressures that faced Nazi soldiers to obey their leaders

5key stages:

·         Difficult social situations leading to

·         Scape-goating (someone who takes blame) less powerful groups

·         Dehumanisation of less powerful groups

·         Moral values and rules incapable to less powerful groups = this is where killing begins

·         If others are passive in this violence the process is enhanced

Neutral and hormonal mechanisms in aggression

Neurotransmitters = chemicals in the brain which transmit messages

Serotonin = reduces aggression as you are less reactive to emotional stimuli. Low levels of serotonin associated with increased impulsive behaviour, aggression and violent suicide.

Mann et al used questionnaires and found that serotonin reducing drugs increased hostility and aggression in males but not in females.

Dopamine

The link between dopamine and aggression is less well established than the link between serotonin and aggression. 

A01

Lavine said that giving amphetamines which increase dopamine increases aggression. Buitelaar said that giving antipsychotics which reduce dopamine reduced aggressive behaviour in violent delinquents

A02

Raleigh – velvet monkeys.  Individuals with a diet that increased serotonin exhibited decreased aggression and vice versa. This suggests the difference in aggression could be linked to serotonin

Coupis and Kennedy – dopamine link may be a consequence not a cause of aggression. In mice dopamine is a positive reinforce in response to aggressive events. This suggests individuals will seek out aggressive situations because they are rewarded for them.

 Hormonal Mechanisms

Testosterone is thought to influence aggression from early adulthood due to its action on the brain areas which control aggression.

Dabbs et al = measured salivary testosterone levels. Those with high levels had a history of violent crime. Measure 692 prisoners, higher levels in rapists and violent offenders than in burglars.

Cortisol mediates aggression related hormones such as testosterone. High levels of cortisol inhibit testosterone, so low levels of cortisol are associated with increased aggression.

Virkuunen found low levels of cortisol in habitual violent offenders. Tennes and Kreye found the same in violent school children.

A02

Mazur – need to distinguish between aggression and dominance. Aggression is one form of dominant behaviour. In humans the influence of testosterone on dominance is likely to be expressed in more subtle ways than in non human animals where the influence of testosterone on dominant behaviour may be shown through aggression.

Mc Burnett et al = longitudinal study on the effect of cortisol on aggressive behaviour in boys with behavioural problems. Those with low cortisol began antisocial acts at a lower age and exhibited three times more aggressive symptoms than boys with high cortisol levels.

A02C

Gender bias – most research done on animals and males however it is known that there is biological differences between men and women

Deterministic – ignores human choice in how we behave. Implies people are not personally responsible for their behaviour.  

Genetic Factors in Aggression

Trying to determine the role of genetic factors in aggression is a question of nature nurture.

Monozygotic= identical twins share genes

Dizygotic = non identical twins share 50% of genes

Coccaro et al – tested adult twins nearly 50% of the variance in direct aggressive behaviour is down to the genetics

A02 – Miles and Carey = Meta analysis 24 twin and adoption studies genetic influence accounts for 50% of variance in aggressive antisocial behaviour

ROLE OF MAOA – no specific gene has been identified in human aggression. The gene responsible for the production of MAOA which regulates the metabolism of serotonin has been related to aggression. Low levels of serotonin are linked to depression and aggressive behaviour.

Genetics and violent crime – Brunner et al = studied dutch family many male members were violent, aggressive and had been involved in crime. These men had low levels of MAOA in their body.

Why is it difficult to establish genetic contributions to aggressive behaviour?

·         More than one gene is usually responsible and contributes to the behaviour

·         As well as genetic factors there are non genetic such an environmental

·         These influences interact with each other – genetic factors may affect which environmental factors have an influence ( gene environment interaction)

Problems assessing aggression in terms of criminal inheritance:

Many studies of aggression have relied on parental or self report; where as other studies have used observational techniques

Ø  Methodological limitations

Ø  Inconclusive evidence

Using non human animals is important as you can use experimental manipulation. This could be selective breeding programs to eliminate a specific gene. Young et al identified genetic mutation that causes violent behaviour in mice. A counterpart does not exist in humans although its function is not known.

Evolutionary explanations of aggression

Evolutionary psychologists argue that the different reproductive challenges faced by our ancestors lead to sex differences.

Male sexual jealously as a result of suspected infidelity is the cause of violence in interpersonal relationships.

In many cultures the murder of an adulterous wife is encouraged.

A01

·         Daly and Wilson

They claim that men have evolved different strategies to deter female partners from having an affair. These range from vigilance to violence and are all fuelled by jealously. This is an adaption that has evolved to deal with uncertainty.

Unlike women, men can never be 100% sure that they are the father of their children; men are at risk of cuckoldry. The consequence of cuckoldry is that men might unwillingly invest his resources into a child that is not his own.

Buss suggests male partners have strategies that have evolved for the purpose of keeping a mate. These include restricting their partner’s autonomy. ‘Direct guarding’ and negative inducements in the form of violent threats to prevent them from straying.

Male sexual jealously is claimed to be the biggest motivation for killings in domestic disputes in the US.

Another problem linked to male violence is sexual infidelity. This could be the voluntary sexual relations between someone married and someone who is not their partner.

A consequence of men’s perceptions or suspicions of their wives sexual infidelity is sexual correction or partner rape.

A02

Uxoricide = wife killing

Jealousy = early indication that man could be violent = real world application to friends and family to alert them of the danger signs

Shackelford et al = this study shows clear relationship between sexual jealously, mate retention strategies by males and violence towards women

Physiological basis for jealousy based aggression = Takanshi et al

Group displays as an adaptive response

Social psychological theories such as Deindividuation don’t tell the whole story about aggression in groups. Aggressive group displays are a product of external stimulus that triggers behaviour.

Sports

Wilson claims xenophobia is the fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners. This has been documented in every group of criminal’s displayer higher forms of social organisation.

Natural selection has favoured those genes that caused altruistic behaviour to people in our group but intolerant to outsiders.

Podalari and Balestri = found evidence of xenophobic tendancies in analysis of Italian football crowds

Territorialitly – Threat display

Another explanation for the evolution of group’s displays in sport is based on territoriality,   the protective response to an invasion of one’s territory.  Territorial behaviour is common in animal species which show threat to outsiders. This can be seen in football matches to make the opponents feel intimidated. It is an adaptive as our ancestors would have been protecting valuable resources.

Testosterone and territorial behaviour

Neave and Wilson found that football teams playing at home were more likely to win than visiting players. This could be evolved from defending home territory which leads to aggressive responses. An increase in testosterone did not occur before away games.

Evolutionary explanation for war is that any behaviour are because of adaptive benefits for the individual and their offspring.

Benefits of aggressive displays = sexual selection

In societies that experience frequent warfare, males are more likely to escape infanticide than females because of their usefulness in the battle. Displays of aggression and bravery are attractive to females.

Acquisition of the status within groups = displays of aggression could lead to peers respecting them more and would strengthen bond in group

Costly displays signal commitment – Anthropologists suggest one of the primary functions of ritual displays is the promotion of group solidarity in terms of collective action.

A02  

+ Foldesi – provides evidence to support the link between xenophobia and violent displays among Hungarian football crows = racist conduct lead to an increase in violence

This could have a cultural bias as it was done in Hungary

Lewis et al = among football fans crowd support rated most important factor contributing to home advantage

Research has provided support for the importance of aggressive displays in determining sexual attractiveness of male warriors. Palmer and Tilley found male youth street gangs have more sexual partners than ordinary males.

War is not in the genes – war emerged when moved from nomadic to settle lifestyle. People could no longer walk away from their troubles as they were tied down to one single settlement.

Gender psychology AQA alevel revision notes PSYA3

What you need to know...

Biological influences on gender

• The role of genes and hormones on gender development
• Evolutionary explanations of gender role
• Biosocial explanations of gender development
• Gender dysphoria

Psychological explanations of gender development

• Kohlberg's cognitive developmental theory
• Gender schema theory

The social context of gender roles

• Social influence on gender role
• Cultural influence on gender role

Gender

Sex = biological fact. Gender = sense of who you are.

XX = Male XY (testosterone) = female (oestrogen and progesterone)

AIS= androgen insensitivity syndrome. Insensitivity to testosterone, externally look female but has testes where ovaries should be

CAH = congenital adrenal hyperplasia

Batisa Family

37 children from Dominican Republic inherited recessive gene. They externally had female genitalia, at puberty this healed over and they grew male genitalia from the burst of testosterone. They accepted this change well; this could be due to them being uncomfortable as female or cultural differences.

Evolutionary perspective

Division of labour = man (hunter) woman (domestic goddess) enhance reproductive success.

Mate choice = physically attractive, resources, youth and fertility

ES theory = women better at emphasising, men better at systematising

Evaluation

Speculative theories = evolutionary explanations are speculative, there is no factual basis

Attachment is for survival = division of gender roles appeared as an adaptive response to the challenges our ancestors faced, this is a biological approach.

1.      Division of labour, 2. Mate choice, 3. Cognitive style

Division of labour

Women are often pregnant or nursing and if she was hunting this would put her life in danger and would not have promoted reproductive success. Division of labour enhances reproductive success, the female can also provide additional food if male hunt fails.

+ Kuhn and Stiner = division of labour lead to the survival of homosapien. Homosapiens eat meat and plants. Both male and female skeletons showed signs of injuries occurred while hunting. The lacks of division lead to Netherlanders dying out. A negative of this study is that it is fitting theory to evidence, it is not falsifiable. An alternative explanation to this could be SLT. You learn gender roles through observation though parents and the media for example.  This could be set by your society and your culture.

Mate choice

Behaviours develop to ensure reproductive success. Men look for strong child bearers so they look for fertility, youth, small waist and large hips. Women want to be protected from danger but also seek comfort and food.

+Buss 1989 = they studied sex choices in a large scale study. He used questionnaires and interviews of over 10,000 people in 37 different cultures. Women looked for financial prospects and ambition. Males looked for physical attraction and both sexes looked for intelligence. 

This study was translated when it in different countries and this could be linked to validity. A negative of this study is that it has social desirability bias as people would answer what they thought the interviewer would want to hear. 

An alternative explanation would be that it is reductionist as mate choices are simplified and other factors are important too

.

Cognitive style (es theory and tendbefriend)

This refers to the way that we think. Es theory was developed by baron cohen and he argued women are better at emphasising and men are better at systemising. This could be due to selective pressures as men hunted and they needed to be better at protection strategies and women focused on child rearing. Tend befriend = women may be more focused on interpersonal concerns.

+Baron Cohen = study of autistic people who have struggles with social relationships. They do well at systemising but not emphasising, they have an extreme male brain.

+Taylor 2000 = Supported tendbefreind as women under stress have increased levels of the hormone oxytocin. This reduces anxiety and makes people sociable.

-          Cant generalise Baron Cohen as autistic people aren’t like normal people

+oxytocin is scientific evidence and that shows that it is accurate

Alternative explanation = biological determinism. This suggests that behaviour is set for us by our biology. It ignores of environment and the fact that we have a choice.

Biological approach to gender development including gender dysphoria

This argues that there is an interaction between biological and social influences. Gender is socially constructed and there are also cultural differences.

Biosocial explanations = biosocial theory = Money and E hrhardt

Social role theory = Eagly and Wood

Biosocial theory – Money and Ehrdardt

Biology determines sex and everything else follows on from there. The child can be labelled and sexualised from the moment the mother finds out its sex. This label is vital and the child could also be mislabelled. Different treatments can interact with biological factors such as the child being exposed to prenatal testosterone.

Selective pressure > physical difference > sex role > psychological difference

Sex/ Social role theory = Eagly and Wood

Evolutionary and social = SRT (social role theory)

Evolution > physical > psychological > sex role

Evolutionary theory states that selective pressures have caused physical and psychological differences but this is not the case.

A01 = evolution may have caused physical differences but the sex role allocated causes physiological differences.

Division of labour = SRT argues that biologically based physical differences, allows them to perform tasks e.g. child bearing. Mens upper body strength is used for hunting. If social roles are similar physiological differences are reduced.

Mate choice = SRT argues that what men and women week in a partner can be related to social roles rather than reproductive traits. Physical differences create social roles. To maximise outcomes wage earner is an added extra.

Hormonal differences = Eagly and Wood have suggested hormonal differences are the outcome of social roles and psychological sex differences, rather than the cause. For example testosterone is not the cause of aggressiveness, it is because men engage in athletic events which create high testosterone levels.

Evaluation of biosocial

Biosocial theory

+ David Reimer biologically a male, raised as a female.

·         Lack of evidence. Money and Ehrdharts theory took a blow from David Reimer study which they hoped would be in their favour.

·         - sample bias. Money and Ehrdharts collected other evidence to support but it all came from study of abnormal individuals e.g. study of genetic females exposed to male hormones such as testosterone in the womb. This evidence is not relevant to normal gender development.

Debates = nature nurture > approach emphasises nurture, the evidence points to nature

Social role theory (alternative to evolutionary approach)

·         Luxen 2007 argues evolutionary theory can explain this. Luxen found sex differences without socialisation. Young children

+monkeys chose sex preferred toys (opposes theory)

-children could be picking toys they recognised e.g. what they have at home > can be socialised from birth so this could support biological predetermination

SRT > Holistic approach – encompassing both biological sex and social theory.

EEA = Evolutionary environment Adaption (how we started off, tribal time period)

Gender dysphoria/ Gender identity disorder

Sex = birth, biological

Gender = 3 years old, culturally derived. Biological approach can give us an indication of how gender dysphoria occurs.

Gender dysphoria = when an individual experiences a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity

Symptoms = feeling uncomfortable with gender assigned at birth. Might feel withdrawn or frustrated. It affects male’s 5:1 females. Another symptom is a lack of interest in gender specific things. The suicide attempted rate is 40%.

Biological explanation = Mismatch between hormones and genetic sex. AIS and CAH result in intersex conditions. External genitalia doesn’t match the genetic sex.

Brain sex theory = BSTC area of brain twice as large in heterosexual males as heterosexual females with twice the amount of neurons. Number of neurons in male to female transsexual is similar to that of females and number of neurons in female to male  transsexual was not found in male rang.

EVALUATION = dessens et al > 250 females with CAH raised as females. No relationship between male hormones and gender dysphoria.

Chung et al = differences in BSTC volume do not develop until adulthood but people report feelings in early childhood.

Psychological explanations

·         Coates et al = case study of a boy with gender dysphoria. Coates argued that this was a defence mechanism to his mother’s depression following an abortion.

·         Stoller = Gender dysphoria is the result of an overly close relationship between mother and son. This leads to child identifying with mother and leads to confused gender identity.

Evaluation of psychological

·         Zuker et al = found a link between males with gender dysphoria and separation anxiety disorder, this can only explain male to female transsexuals.

·         Cole et al = found that the range of psychiatric conditions displayed by those with gender dysphoria was no greater than those in a normal population.

Kohlberg’s cognitive development theory

Stage 1 = gender labelling, stage 2 = gender stability, stage 3 = gender consistency

Jean Piaget = leading expert in developmental psychology. Argued that the way we think changes as we get older, this is because of physical changes in the brain.

Children can’t distinguish between appearance and reality. Kohlberg argued changes in gender thinking came about because of natural changes of a child’s cognitive development.

Gender labelling = age 2-3 they can label themselves and others, this label is based on outward appearance

Gender stability = age 4-6 children recognise gender is constant over time. Boys grow into men and girls grow into women. Their understanding of gender is stable but isn’t constant; they think males can change into females if they do female activities.

Gender constant = Age 6+ the children realise that gender is stable across time and situations. 

Child now fully understands gender so they see gender appropriate behaviour. Up until now it was not relevant as a child they believed that gender may change.

GST = Gender Schema Theory Martin and Halverson 1981 = start gender age 2-3

Martin and Halverson believed that the key to gender development is getting information about gender, not just through reward and punishment of gender appropriate behaviours. They thought that this happened before gender consistency which is age 2-3 this is different to Kohlberg. Basic gender identification is enough for a child to identify themselves as boy or girl. They learn schemas through interactions with others

Outgroup = groups we don’t identify with e.g. girls don’t identify with boys

Ingroup = the groups which a person does identify with e.g. boys identify with boys

Once a child has identified with a group this leads to them positively evaluating their own group. This leads them to be like their own group as they take the responsibility to investigate ingroup behaviours and avoid outgroup behaviours. They focus on ingroup schemas before gender constancy. Activities of ingroup leads to the expansion of schemas.

Resilience = This explains why children have fixed gender attitudes. Any information not consistent with ingroup schemas is over looked and ignored.

e.g. if a child sees a program with a male nurse they will simply call this man a doctor instead as his is not acting consistently with ingroup schemas. The existing schema is not changed as they have gender resilience.

Alternative explanation = The compromise ( Stangor and Rubble)

·         Gender schema = organisation of information and is linked to memory

·         Gender constancy = theory concerned with motivation when you find out you are a girl, you are motivated to find out behaviour gender appropriate to that role

Tested children ages 4-10 and found:

·         Memory and organisation for gender constant pictures increased with age (GST)

·         Preference for same sex toys increased with gender constancy = GCT

EVALUATION

+ MARTIN AND LITTLE 1990 SUPPORTS GENDER STEREOTYPES WITHOUT CONSTANCY

Children under age of 4 showed no signs of gender stability, let alone signs of consistency. They did display strong gender stereotypes. This shows they have acquired information about gender roles before Kohlberg suggested, in line with GST

-          HOFFMAN 1998 =

Children whos mothers work have less stereotyped views of what men do. This suggests that children are not entirely fixed on gender schemes and can take on gender inconsistent ideas.

+ MARTIN AND HALVERSON SUPPORT RESILLIENCE

They showed children pictures of individuals in cross gender activities eg male nurse. The children all ignored the point, distorted the information or forgot it. This demonstrates the resilience of childrens gender role beliefs. They admit data that is consistent with their schema and disregard data that isn’t.

Social Influences on Gender Role

Bandura = SLT, BoBo doll study, vicarious learning, imitation, same sex models, observation, reinforcement and reward.

Sources of information = parents, friends, media.

Social Cognitive Theory:

o   Indirect reinforcement Children observe the behaviour of others and learn consequences of behaviour (vicarious reinforcement). This information this information is then stored as an expectancy of future outcomes, the learning behaviour is imitation or modelling.

o   Direct reinforcement Through praise or absence of praise. Children observe the behaviour of both male and female role models but they may not imitate everything they learn. This could be explained by direct reinforcement where boys are praised for ‘male behaviour’ and girls for ‘female behaviour’.

o   Direct tuition Children also learn behaviours through direct tuition; explicit direct instructions about appropriate gender behaviour. Children also learn through vicarious reinforcement (indirect) but also through explicit (direct) instructions about appropriate gender behaviour. Direct tuition begins as children acquire linguistic skills

Cross cultural studies of gender

Culture = ideas, rules, customs, morals and behaviours that bind a particular group of people together

Cross cultural studies help us decide if its biology or socialisation which determine gender

Cultural similarities division of labour

·         Munroe and Munroe 1975 = every society has some division of labour and behaviour by gender

·         Girls are socialised more to compliance (nurturing, responsibility, obedience)

·         Boys are socialised to assertiveness (independence, self reliance, achievement)

Cultural differences – magnitude of sex differences:

·         Berry et al 2002 = studied spatial perception in 17 societies. Male superiority was only found in tight knit sedimentary societies, but was absent or reserved in nomadic societies

·         Also found conformity in highest sedimentary societies.

·         Found historical changes = the gender gap is decreasing which supports the role of changing social influences

·         Gender differences are due to the society you live in

Cultural differences UK = men have better spatial awareness this was for hunting and suggests that there is an evolutionary link

Cultural differences Sahara = men and women have the same spatial awareness as they are nomadic = this suggests and social link.