Issues and Debates

• Gender bias

  Results when one gender is treated less favourably than the other, three main types:

  • Alpha bias
  • Beta bias
  • Androcentrism
• Alpha bias 


  Occurs when the differences between men and women are exaggerated
• Beta bias 


  Occurs when the differences between men and women are minimised - often happens when findings obtained from men are applied to women without additional validation
• Androcentrism 


  Taking male thinking/behaviour as normal, regarding female thinking/behaviour as deviant, inferior, abnormal, or 'other' when it is different
• Culture bias 


  Cultures may differ from one another in many ways, so the findings of psychological research conducted in one culture may not apply directly to another
• Emic construct 


  One that is applied to only one cultural group, so they vary from place to place
• Etic construct


  Theoretical idea that is assumed to apply in all cultural groups
• Ethnocentrism 


  Occurs when a researcher assumes that their own culturally specific practices or ideas are 'natural' or 'right'
• Cultural relativism 


  The principle of regarding the beliefs, values, and practices of a culture from the viewpoint of that culture itself
• Free will v Determinism

  Revolves around the extent to which our behaviour is the result of forces over which we have no control or whether people are able to decide for themselves whether to act or behave in a certain way
• Free will


  Suggests that we all have a choice and can control and choose our own behaviour, approach is all bout personal responsibility, plays a central role in humanistic psychology
• Free will - Evaluation

  Strengths:

  • Emphasises the importance of the individual
  • Fits society's view of personal responsibility

  Weaknesses:

  • Is subjective, some argue doesn't exist
  • Impossible to scientifically test the concept
• Determinism 


  Proposes that all behaviour is determined and thus predictable
• Types of determinism 


  Environmental determinism

  Biological determinism

  Psychic determinism
• Environmental determinism 


  Idea that our behaviour is caused by some sort of outside influence

  Skinner (1971) - argued that freedom is an illusion
• Biological determinism 


  Our biological systems, such as the nervous system, governs our behaviour
• Psychic determinism 


  Freud believed childhood experiences and unconscious motivations governed behaviour
• Levels of determinism 


  Hard determinism

  Soft determinism
• Hard determinism 


  Sees free will as an illusion and believes that every event and action has a cause
• Soft determinism 


  Represents a middle ground, people do have a choice, but that choice is constrained by external factors
• Determinism - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Scientific and allows cause and effect to be established
  • Gives plausible explanations for behaviour backed by evidence

  Weaknesses:

  • Determinism is reductionist
  • Does not account for individual differences
• Nature v Nurture 


  Central question is the extent to which our behaviour is determined by our biology (nature) and the genes we inherit from our parents, versus the influence of environmental factors (nurture) such as home school and friends
• Nature 


  The view that all our behaviour is determined by our biology and our genes, this is not the same as the characteristics you are born with

  Evolutionary explanations exemplify the nature approach
• Nature - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Bowlby's explanation of attachment does not ignore environmental influences, as is generally true for evolutionary
  • Leads a child to develop expectations others will be equally sensitive

  Weaknesses:

  • Problem of transgenerational effects
• Nurture


  View that all behaviour is learned and influenced by external factors such as the environment

  Behaviourist approach is a clear example of nurture (SLT)
• Nurture - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Empirical evidence

  Weaknesses:

  • Behaviourist accounts are all in terms of learning, but even learning itself has a genetic basis
• Holism 


  Often referred to as gestalt psychology, argues behaviour cannot be understood in terms of the components that make them up, a 'whole way' of looking at it
• Holism - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Looks at everything
  • Does not ignored the complexity of behaviour
  • It can be higher in ecological validity

  Weaknesses:

  • Over-complicate behaviours that may have simpler explanations
  • Neglects the importance of biological explanations
• Reductionism 


  Belief that human behaviour can be explained by breaking it down into smaller component parts, look very closely at the very simplest parts that make up our systems

  Biological explanation is extremely reductionist

  Cognitive psychology - Machine reductionism

  Behaviourist psychology - Simple stimulus/response

  Psychodynamic psychology - Unconscious motivation
• Reductionism - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Allows scientific study to be carried out
  • Research into genetic basis of mental disorders has enabled researchers to identify specific genes to be responsible

  Weaknesses:

  • Can be over-simplistic
  • Does not address larger societal issues e.g. poverty
• Nomothetic approach 


  Looks at how our behaviours are similar to each other as human beings - looks to establish general rules for multiple groups of people
• Nomothetic - Evaluation


  Strengths:

  • Seen as more scientific than the idiographic approach
  • Enables us to make predictions about how people are likely to react in certain circumstances

  Weaknesses:

  • Predictions can be made about groups, but may not apply to individuals
  • Approach accused of losing sight of the 'whole person'
• Idiographic approach


  Looks at how our behaviours are different from each other - psychologists interested in this aspect of experience want to discover what makes us unique
• Idiographic - Evaluation 


  Strengths:

  • Focus on individual

  Weaknesses:

  • Very time-consuming approach, takes a lot of time and money to study individuals in depth
• Ethical guidelines for carrying out socially sensitive research


  Sieber and Stanley criteria:

  • Privacy
  • Confidentiality
  • Sound and valid methodology
  • Deception
  • Informed consent
  • Justice and equitable treatment
  • Scientific freedom
  • Ownership of data
  • Values of social scientists
  • Cost/benefit analysis
• Socially sensitive research - Evaluation

  Arguments for:

  • Better understanding of gender, race, sexuality allow for greater acceptance
  • Unrepresentative (White middle-class Americans)

  Arguments against:

  • Flawed research has been used to dictate social policy
  • Guidelines to control SSR lack power, and as a result unable to prevent indefensible research