FREE WILL + DETERMINISM

• the debate

  is our behaviour a matter of free will or are we the product of internal/external influences ?

  Most approaches in psychology are determinist but disagree on the causes of human behaviour. 
• free will (self-determining)


  humans are free to make their own choices - we can reject biological and environmental influences on our behaviour. = view of the humanistic approach. 
• determinism

  Hard (fatalism) = all human action has a cause and it should be possible to to identify these causes. 

  Soft = all human action has a cause but people have freedom to make choices within a restricted range of options.
• biological determinism 


  the belief that behaviour is caused by biological (genetic, hormonal, evolutionary) influences that we cannot control. EXAMPLE = the influence of the autonomic nervous system on the stress or the influence of genes on mental health.
• environmental determinism 


  the belief that behaviour is caused by features of the environment (conditioning, history of reinforcement) that we cannot control. EXAMPLE = SKINNER described free will as ‘an illusion’ and all behaviour as the result of conditioning. Our experience of ‘choice’ is the sum total of reinforcement contingencies that have acted upon us throughout our lives. 
• psychic determinism 


  the belief that behaviour is caused by unconscious conflicts that we cannot control (e.g repressed conflicts, innate drives etc.) EXAMPLE = FREUD emphasised the influence of biological drives and unconscious conflicts repressed in childhood. Even something as seemingly random as a ‘slip of the tongue’ can be explained by the unconscious. 
• THE SCIENTIFIC EMPHASIS ON CAUSAL EXPLANATIONS

  (science seeks to find causal explanations where one thing is determined by another) 

  Principle of science = every event has a cause, which can be explained using general laws (cause and effect).

  This allows researchers to predict and control events in the future. 

  Laboratory experiments allow for controlled conditions, removing extraneous variables in an attempt to precisely control and predict human behaviour.

  Hypothesis = empirical methods - significant effect. 
• (+) determinism

  1. It is consistent with the aims of science =

  The notion that human behaviour is orderly and obeys laws, places psychology on equal footing with other more established sciences, increasing its credibility. 

  • That the prediction and control of human behaviour has led to the development of

  treatments and therapies (e.g drug treatments to manage sz). The experience of size suggests some behaviours are determines (no one ‘chooses’ to have sz)
• LIMITATION OF DETERMINISM 

  1. Hard determinism is not consistent with the legal system =

  Offenders are morally accountable for their actions in law. Only in extreme circumstances are juries instructed to act with leniency (e.g when the law of diminished responsibility is applied in cases of mental illness).  
• LIMITATION OF DETERMINISM

  2. Determinism as an approach to scientific enquiry is not falsifiable. It is based on the idea that causes of behaviour will always exist, even though they may not yet have been found out. 

  As a basic principle, this is impossible to disprove. This suggests that the determinist approach may not be as scientific as it first appears. 
• SUPPORT FOR FREE WILL

  1. We often make choices in everyday life = 

  Everyday experience ‘gives the impression’ that we are constantly making choices on any given day. This gives face validity to the idea of free will (i.e it makes sense)

  • Even if we do not have free will, the fact that we think we do may have a positive impact on our mind and behaviour. 

  ROBERTS ET AL = showed that adolescents with a strong belief in fatalism (that their lives were ‘decided’ by events outside their control) were more at risk of depression.
• LIMITATION OF FREE WILL

  1. It is not supported by neurological evidence = 

  Brain studies of decision making have revealed evidence against free will - and slightly disturbing evidence at that. 

  LIBET + SOON = found that the brain activity related to the decision to press a button with the left or right hand occurs up to 10 seconds before participants report being consciously aware of making such a decision.

  This shows that even our most basic experiences of free will are decided and determined by our brain before we become aware of them. 
• INTERACTIONIST APPROACH

  Approaches in psychology that have a cognitive element (e.g social learning theory) are those which tend to adopt a soft determinist approach.

  BANDURA argues that although environmental factors in learning are key, we are free to choose who or what to attend to and when to perform certain behaviours. 

  This interactionist approach is helpful in understanding aspects of human behaviour which are not a straightforward choice between free will and determinism (e.g learning)
• (-) DETERMINISM 


  It is doubtful that 100% genetic determinism will ever be found for any behaviour as studies investigating similarity in behaviours of twins have never found complete similarity. E.g the concordance rates between MZ twins for aggression is only 35%, and this does drop to 12% in DZ twins. This does suggest that genes do influence behaviour, however concordance rates are not 100% despite MZ twins sharing the same genetic information. I.e it is likely that the environment also influences behaviour.
• (-) DETERMINISM 


  oversimplify human behaviour. This is because it implies that behaviour is out of our control and we cannot change it, which is not always the case for most people. This may be appropriate for explaining animals that act more instinctively but human behaviour is governed much more by conscious decision making. This has led to many theorists, law practitioners and psychologists being against a deterministic explanation for behaviour as it could act as a defence against criminal convictions. Because it implies that the behaviour was out of the individual's control.
• (-) FREE WILL 


   brain imaging techniques found activity in the brain before the behaviour even occurred. E.g SOON ET AL found activity in the prefrontal cortex up to 10 seconds before the person was aware of their conscious decision to move. This suggests that we are not always in complete cognitive control on how or when we behave. Although other psychologists have argued that this brain activity is simply a readiness to act rather than an intention to move.
• (+) Humanistic psychologists like ROGERS + MASLOW believe that taking responsibility for behaviour is a necessary part of human behaviour and without it personal growth and improvement can not occur. The idea is that in order to improve you must take moral responsibility for your actions regardless of internal or external forces.
• (-) However, SKINNER argued that simply choosing between different courses of action may not be free will but could give the illusion of being free will. His point was that we might choose a particular car to buy, however these choices were determined by previous reinforcement factors outside of our control.