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.

MEDIA AQA PSYCHOLOGY

MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY

SYNOPTIC TOOL KIT MAID – D (DEBATES)	SCIENTIFIC VS NON SCIENTIFIC	NATURE VS NURTURE	HOLISM VS REDUCTIONIST	FREE WILL VS DETERMINISM
BIOLOGICAL BING	SCIENTIFIC Because it considers bing Also uses empirical evidence. The research is objective. It is falsifiable and has a testable hypothesis	NATURE It is a matter of genetics. Nurture could also influence the way you think	REDUCTIONIST It doesn’t consider other approaches such as environmental influence or social situations	DETERMINISTIC Things that you can’t change..based on your genetics
BEHAVIOURIST SLT	SCIENTIFIC Uses empirical evidence. Can test the hypothesis. You can question its objectivity	NURTURE It looks at your environment. There is also a biological basis	REDUCTIONIST Reduces study to behaviour which is environmentally based. SLT could have biological predisposition	ENVRONMENTAL DETERMISM It suggests you learn from your surroundings. Adults could have free will but it is case dependent.
COGNITIVE ABC	SCIENTIFIC Because it deals with the brain. It has a testable hypothesis, also uses empirical evidence	IT DEPENDS Nature because you are born with your brain but nurture because friends can influence the way you see things.	REDUCTIONISM Focuses on brain and mental processing – ignores all other elements E.G environment	FREE WILL You decide how you think. Free will in treatment but determinism in basis.
PSYCHODYNAMIC ID EGO SUPEREGO	NON SCIENTIFIC Hypothesis cannot be proven. There is no objectivity. It is based on individual case studies.	NURTURE Based  upon childhood experiences	REDUCTIONIST Simplifies behaviour to childhood experiences	DETERMISISM Based on childhood experiences

APPROACHES: 1.       Cognitive 2.       Behaviourist 3.       Psychodynamic 4.       Biological

M= methodology
A= approaches

I= issues

D = debates

BIOLOGICAL = BING

·         B = brain (neuroautonomy, structure of brain)

·         I= injury / infection (Kilve wearing, influenza)

·         N= neurotransmitters (dopamine, serotonin, adrenaline)

·         G=genetics (hereditary, DNA)

BEHAVIOURIST (BORN AS BLANK SLATE = TABULA RASA)

·         all behaviour is learnt

·         classical conditioning – learning through association

·         operant conditioning – learning through reinforcement

·         SLT social learning theory – learn by observing – reinforcement and repetition

PSYCHODYNAMIC

·         Freud tripartite personality

·         Stages of development = oral, anal, phallic, latent, genital

·         ID, EGO, SUPERERGO.

·         Ice berg structure, unconscious desires, pleasure principle

COGNITIVE

·         Thought processes. Input – process – output. Input = environmental stimuli, process = rational/irrational thoughts, output = behaviour

·         ELLIS ABC MODEL

·         A= activating event, B= belief rational or irrational, C= consequence

DEBATES:

1 .NATURE VS NURTURE

Born vs learned, biology vs environment

Were you born that way or did your environment influence you?

2 .REDUCTIONISM VS HOLISM

Reduce complex behaviour into base components. It has a clear focus.

Holistic therapy. Holism takes everything into account

3 .FREE WILL VS DETERMINISM

Free will = you make your own choices

Determinism = pre programmed controlled by your environment.

4 .SCIENTIFIC VS NON SCIENTIFIC

Does it encounter science into it?

SOCIAL LEANRING THEORY:

·         Developed by Albert Bandura in 1977

·         States that behaviour is learned from your environment through observational learning

·         Children copy models regardless if it is gender appropriate or not

·         Child is more likely to imitate behaviour that is gender appropriate or if its imitated with reinforcement or punishment.

·         Positive and negative reinforcement has little impact if reinforcement offered externally does not match with individual needs

·         Vicarious reinforcement = when you see someone else get positive feedback so the child is more likely to copy the behaviour.

External = if child wants approval from friends or peers

Internal = Feeling happy about actions

Bandura 1986 Bobo Doll Study

Children observed aggressive or non aggressive adult models; they were tested for imitative learning. Participants were ages between 3-5 years old. They observed adults interacting with the doll. Children in the aggressive condition reproduced a good deal of physical and verbal aggression. Children in the non aggressive condition exhibited no aggression to the doll.

+ This experiment shows that aggressive behaviour can be learned even with the absence of direct reinforcement.

-Demand characteristics. Child was quoted saying ‘’look mummy that’s the doll we have to hit’’ this means that if the child knew the aim of the study they may act in a certain way, making the results biased.

3 types of model –

1.       Live model (person performing behaviour)

2.       Verbal instruction model (details of behaviour)

3.       Symbolic model  (real or fictional character demonstrating behaviour EG on Tv show)

External reinforcement = reward and punishment

Intrinsic reinforcement = form of internal reward / better feeling 

Modelling process=

1.       Attention – watch model

2.       Retention- absorb it so that you can imitate it

3.       Reproduction- copy behaviour

4.       Motivation or reinforcement – positive or negative reinforcement. Reward, punishment, approval

Cognitive Priming = watching violence leads to people to store the acts as memories/scripts then later retrieve these and activate them in real life situations

Arousal = physiological response happens when you watch violence this is called increased arousal. Zillmans excitation theory argues that arousal produced is transferred to real life situation that involves conflict. If person is provoked and they are already in a heightened state they can misinterpret this resulting in an aggressive response.

Imitation = this explanation comes from SLT and Banduras Bo Bo doll study. Children observe behaviour of people they may admire and they later imitate this

Desensitisation = this explanation leads on from increased arousal. When a person regularly watches violent media they become used to it, decreasing arousal. When faced with real life violence watchers are desensitised and do not experience a stress response.

Huesmann et al 2003

Longitudinal study of 557 boys and girls in Chicago in 1977 when they were aged 5-8. They were asked about their favourite tv shows and characters. They were asked which character they most identified with. In 1991 398 were followed up in their early 20s, they were asked the same questions again. They also interviewed 3 people who knew them well; they had to common on how often the ppt looses their temper and if they were violent. Criminal records were also analysed. The viewing of violent tv shows when children were aged 6-9 correlated with violence in later life. Men classified as high violence viewers had three times the criminal conviction rate of low violence viewers.

Gunter et al 2002

Studied introduction of tv to remote community of st Helena. 23 boys and 23 girls 2 years before introduction of tv. Their teachers were asked to comment of their levels of antisocial behaviour using a checklist. Gunter returned 3 years after the introduction of tv, he asked the children to keep a 3 day diary of the tv that they watched. They were assessed by their teachers again. He found that children watched on average 3 hours of tv per day and were exposed to 95 acts of violence. Boys saw more violence and rated more antisocial. There was no overall increase in aggressive behaviour post tv. Children with higher antisocial score were more likely to watch cartoons.

Topic 2: Media influences on pro-social behavior

On average people watch 25 hours of television per week. It increases rapidly from 7 hours per week in two year olds, to 20 hours by the age of six. This declines in teenagers, and then rises again through adulthood. All viewers are exposed to large amounts of pro social behavior.

Explanations for media influence on pro-social behavior

1.       Exposure. As well as being exposed to violence, people are also exposed to pro-social behavior. Greenberg et al 2002 found that among the favorite TV shows of 8-12 year olds there was an average of 42 acts of anti-social behavior and 44 acts of pro-social behavior.

Howards and Roberts 2002 studied toddlers watching the teletubies. Responses included joining in with the actions, interacting with viewing companions, pointing to the screen and answering the questions of the characters.

2.       Social Learning Theory Banduras social learning theory suggests that children learn through observing behavior, then later imitating it if the expectation of a reward is greater than expectation of a punishment. This process is the same for pro-social acts, as it is for anti-social acts, however pro-social acts are likely to be in accordance with social norms, so they are associated with the expectation of reinforcement.  This reward acts as a motivation to repeat the action.

3.       Developmental factors child development research has shown that pro-social behavior is dependent on the developmental stage of the child. Perspective, empathy and moral reasoning develop through childhood and adolescence. Young children are less able to recognize emotional state of others and how to help. They may also not be able to understand complex pro-social messages portrayed in media.

4.       Parental meditation Many children watch TV alone, however they sometimes have a co-viewer. Parents who watch their children and discuss the themes and content can enhance the learning experience.

Rosenkoetter 1999 suggested that with parental mediation, children as young as 7 were able to understand complex moral messages.

Mares 1996

Meta-analysis studying 4 different categories of prosocial behavior spread over 39 different studies.

·         Positive interactions – children saw positive interactions acted more positively in their own interactions with others compared to those who viewed neutral or antisocial content. The effect size was found to be moderate.

·         Altruism – This included sharing, donating, offering help and comforting. Children who viewed altruistic behavior acted altruistically than the ones who viewed neutral or antisocial content. When altruism was not explicitly modelled the effect size was much smaller.

·         Anti-stereotyping – Looked at the effects of counter stereotypical portrayals and ethnicity and attitudes and beliefs. Children who viewed counter stereotypical themes showed less evidence of stereotyping and prejudice in their own beliefs. The effect size was moderate, but was larger when exposure to counter stereotypical themes in the context of the school classroom was accompanied by extra classroom activities designed to expand on the issues viewed.

·         Self-control – this included resistance to temptation, obedience to rules, ability to work independently and persistence at a task. Children who were observed models exercising self-control tended to show more self-control in their own behavior, particularly compared with those who saw a model behaving anti-socially. The effect size was moderate when compared with a neutral group, but large when compared with anti-social content.

Cole et al 2003

Cole investigated if Sesame Street taught mutual respect and understanding between Palestinian and Israeli children.  Before watching there were few negative comments, after watching there was an increase in positive attributes noted. Males and females were equally positively affected by pro-social content and there were no ethnic or racial differences, however effects were stronger among higher socio-economic groups where parental mediation was higher.

Fogel 2007

Fogel researched the effects of parental mediation. In condition 1children watched a 30minute clip of ‘hang time’ then had a 15 minute discussion about the clip with an adult. In condition 2 children watched the same clip, but did not have a discussion. Those who discussed it with an adult (parental mediation) scored higher in measures of pro-social behaviour including tolerance and friendship.

Negative effects of games and computers

Guo 2007

Guo identified the main effects of playing violent video games. He said that as physiological arousal and aggressive behaviours increase, helping behaviour decrease. Research has also pointed out de-sensitisation effect of computer games to both gaming and real life violence.

Carnagey, Anderson and Bushman 2007

They examined the effects of playing violent computer games on later responses to real life violence. A sample of participants were asked about their gaming habits and then randomly allocated to one of two conditions: playing a randomly selected violent game for 20 minutes, or playing a non-violent randomly selected game for 20 minutes. They then all watched a film with real life violence whilst wired to measure physiological response of heart rate and skin response. Those who played a violent game had lower heart rate and skin response.

GAM = General aggression model

Input variables which include individual factors (such as personality and gender) and situational variables (such as provocation) can influence reaction to playing violent games. Exposure to games is said to increase aggression through three pathways:

·         Arousal: playing violent games leads to increased arousal. A high level of arousal can lead to aggressive behaviour.

·         Cognition: Playing violent video games leads to priming of aggressive thoughts

·         Affective: Playing violent games increases aggressive or hostile feelings.

Karpinsky 2009

Found a strong relationship between Facebook use and academic under achievement. Majority of people who use Facebook every day underachieved by a whole grade. Facebook users spent between one and five hours a week studying, while non Facebook users spent between 11 and 15 hours per week. The link between Facebook and non Facebook users was even seen in graduate students.

Charles 2011

Charles used a focus group and interview techniques to investigate the Facebook habits of 200 undergraduates in Scotland. 12% experienced anxiety related to their use of Facebook. The more friends they had, the more anxiety they had. They reported stress from deleting unwanted contacts and the pressure to be humorous. 32% stated that rejecting friend requests made them feel guilty and 10% disliked receiving friend requests.

Positive effects of games and computers on behaviour

Greitemeyer and Ozzwald 2010

They gave participants one of three games to play: lemmings (where you ensure safety), an aggressive game and Tetris and a neutral game for 8 minutes. The researcher then accidently knocked over a pot of pencils. 67% people who played Lemmings helped 28% people who were lamers and 33% who played Tetris.

REAL WORLD APPLICATION = HOLMES ET AL 2010

They showed volunteers traumatic images of personal injury. 30 minutes later some participants played Tetris for 10 minutes, some did nothing. Those who played Tetris had fewer flashbacks. When the gap between images and game was increased to 4 hours, the effect was still noted. The researchers concluded that game interferes with the way traumatic memories are formed.

Hyper personal model – Walther 1996 this can explain the link between Facebook and positive self esteem. We self select information to represent our selves; we pick it to make us look good. This acts as positive feedback as nice messages are left by our friends and family.

Peter et al 2005

They studied 493 adolescents in Denmark using questionnaires and interviews to study the relationship between personality types and online friendship formation. They found that introverted adolescents were strongly motivated to communicate online.

Gonzales and Hancock 2011

They argue that Facebook walls can have positive influence on self esteem. Feedback can be very positive. Students were given three minutes to 1) use their Facebook page, 2) look at themselves in the mirror, or 3) do nothing. Those who had interacted with their Facebook page gave much more positive feedback than the two other groups.

Media and Persuasion

The Hovland Yale model

The hovland yale model argues that persuasions is dependent on several factors: the source, the message and the target.

·         The source – Experts are more effective at persuasion as they have knowledge. This could also be a celebrity endorsement as they are attractive.

·         The message- Messages are more persuasive if we think we are not being persuaded.  A message can be more effective if it creates a moderate level of fear, and if it is repeated.

·         Audience – Low and high intelligence audiences are easily persuaded than those with moderate intelligence. Intelligent audiences like to evaluate both sides of the argument. The argument needs to be clear enough for low intelligence people to understand it.

Evaluation of Hovland Yale model

·         Attractive sources are not most influential O’mahony and meenagan 1997 showed that celebrities are not convincing or believable. Hume 1992 = celebrity endorsement fails as people remember the celebrity and not the actual product

+ Fear appeals do work. Appeals can be persuasive if they do not petrify the audience and if they are informed of how to avoid the danger

-Gender bias in persuasive research Women are more susceptible to persuasive communications. Eagly and carli 1981 explained this in terms of socialisation differences- women socialised to conform. Sistrunk and McDavid 1971 claimed that studies find women more easily persuaded.

Elaboration Likelihood model – Petty and cacioppo (central and peripheral routes to persuasion

Message – central route – audience motivated to think about message – focus on quality of argument – lasting attitude change

Message- Peripheral route – audience not motivated to think about message – focus on peripheral factors – temporary attitude change

·         Central route = message is important; the focus is placed upon the quality of the argument, as the audience has a high need for cognition. This is likely to result in attitude changes.

·         Peripheral route = Audience focus is on context, not the actual message hidden in it. Focus is placed upon the contextual cues such as celebrity endorsement or the mood created. The final attitude change is likely to be temporary. This is most commonly used.

An important factor in the ELM is the need for cognition. The degree to which they enjoy thinking about the information they receive and analysing problems. Need for cognition is an individual difference. People with a high need for cognition can reflect on information well so that they have a good understanding of the world.

Evaluation of elaboration Likelihood model

-          Influence from peripheral route is only temporary although the peripheral route influence can be considerable, there is a strong likelihood that any change produced by this route is temporary – Penner and Frizsche 1993.

-          Most humans are cognitive misers Friske and Taylor 1984 Humans rely on simple time efficient strategies when evaluating and making time efficient decisions. If the content of a message  is not personally important then we are more influenced by contextual cues such as celebrity endorsement. When content is important they are better motivated to process message carefully.

+Support for the temporary attitude change of the peripheral route comes from Penner and Fritzche US basketball player Johnson Jr announced he was HIV positive. Penner and Friztche were psychologists collecting data about people’s willingness to help people with AIDS. After basketball player came out, helping rate rose to 83%.

Media and persuasiveness of television advertising

Pester power

Especially in the run up to Christmas adverts are aimed at children with the intention that they will go and pester their parents to buy the product for them. In Sweden it is illegal to aim an advert at a child under 12, this is to stop pester power. Pine and nash 2001 found a positive correlation between television exposure and Christmas gift request increases.

Evaluation = to measure persuasiveness researchers use data from how much viewers liked the product after viewing. However for an advert to be persuasive it should lead to an actual purchase.  

Does celebrity endorsement work? Martin et al 2008

He found that student participants were more convinced by a television endorsement from a fictional character when buying a digital camera than one from a celebrity. The researchers claimed that young people like to make sure the product is fashionable among people who resemble them, rather than approved by celebrities.

Methodological limitations – Erfgen 2011

He claims that research on the persuasiveness of celebrity endorsement has focussed on the characteristics of the celebrity and less on the message communicated. Celebrities endorse a product in several ways: implicitly (I use this product), explicitly (I endorse this product), in co-present mode (celebrity and product are depicted simultaneously).

Attraction of celebrity social psychological explanation

s

Parasocial relationship = where an individual is attracted to another who’s is unaware of the existence of the person who created the relationship

Attachment theory suggests that the tendency to develop parasocial relationships starts in childhood. Insecurely attached children are more likely to form parasocial relationships. These relationships are seen as desirable because there is no chance of being rejected.

Schiappa et al 2007

Schiappa examined research on parasocial relationships to predict factors that lead to that type of relationship. The predictors found were attractiveness, similarity and real. If the character discloses personal information we feel intimate with them.

Evaluation = Derrick et al 2008

Derrick examined the relationship between self esteem and identification with a parasocial relationship. Those with low self esteem saw their favourite celebrity as similar to themselves. Benefits unique to parasocial relationships are not experienced in real life situations.

Absorption Addiction Model

This model explains how a compromised identity structure can lead to a psychological absorption with a celebrity in attempt to establish an identity. Giles and Maltby 2006 identified this process:

·         Entertainment social – fans are attracted to a celebrity because of their ability to entertain, act as gossip and social interaction.

·         Intense-personal- This reflects intense and compulsive feelings about the celebrity. For example fans may believe they are soul mates.

·         Borderline pathological- This includes uncontrollable behaviours and fantasies about their celebrity.

How fans move through these stages: MCutcheon et al 2002

He argues that people have parasocial relationships due to lacks in their real life; they use parasocial relationships as an escape to reality. People may follow celebrities to gain a sense of identity and fulfilment. Motivational forces driving this absorption can become addictive.

Evaluation = social desirability bias, based on questionnaire = not accurate

Persuasive techniques =

·         Hard and soft cell – hard cell is the central route e.g. face to face sell where you present the factors of the product. Soft cell is the peripheral route where you create a feeling about the product.

·         Product endorsement – Hovland Yale model ‘source factors’ we develop parasocial relationships where we trust their judgement as we want to be like them. Product endorsement is similar to a stamp of approval.

·         Pester power – Advertising aimed at children with the idea they pester their parents. This has been made illegal to aim adverts at under 12s in Sweden.

·          Sex and violence – Advertisers are interested in the age group 18-34 as they have a disposable income and have no regular spending habits such as children or a mortgage.  They put adverts in programs where the TV show also has a high level of sex and violence.