Classic research

• Classic Evidence


  Watson & Raunor (1920)
• Methodology


  1. Conroued cosenation in a controued lab experiment

  2. Not a case study or expenment

  3. Procedures - Recorded with motion picture camera
• Session 1


  • 11m 3d
  • when rat presented to him but when he reached for it a meal bar coas Strack behind his head
  • finding when bar Strock he damped, fel forward and buned head under tovor, when bar was struck a 2nd time he buned head under tabic by & whimpered but didnt cry
• Session 2


  • 11m 10d
  • was shown nat with no Sound
  • Join STYMUIation 5 times
  • He didm reach for rat bur when rat was Pushed toward nim he reached for it and when it touched he quickly wandrew
  • He was given wooden blocks which he happily played wan
  • After bint stimulation he became more distressed
  • When rat was shown again he cned and crawled away so fast he was difficult to patch
• Session 3


  • 11m 15d
  • Presented with wooden blooms, fat, nabbit, dog, for Coat, Cotton Wool & Wassons hair
  • Played happily with blocks, had extreme response for rabbit like he did wun raz, he played with cotten. cooo! that was in a paper loag and became less cautiods of it over time, he had no reaction to watsons hair
  • But not with dog & for Coat
• Session 4


  • 11m 20d
  • moved to a wen-Ire the core room wan people present
  • Response to Ran, Rom, Dog were less extreme..But after Joint Summation it was stranger
  • He awways played. own bocnis happily which shows fear response was only for furry obwears
• Session 5


  • 12m 2ld
  • Brought to lab in uwenm br not tested
  • rested one last time wash Sama mask, rabbit, fat, dog. for coat & bLOCKS
  • Response nos as strong as before bun still avoided furry Obleas & whimpered, som occasionally crying
• Classic Evidence


  Raine et al (1997)
• Methodology


  Quasi-difference experiment with opportunity sampling of 82pps wm matched paire design
• IV


  Gucose metabolism of regions of the brain (brain activity)
• DV


  NGRI or not
• NGRI group


  39men 2 women, mean age 34.3 wim history of Brain damage of Intury
• Control group


  39 men + 2 women, mean age 31.3, non-criminal
• In the Nodi group they had anumber of lunesses .g. 6 with Schizophrenia, 23 with brain injung OR damage & 3. Psychoactive ang akuse
• In controls, the 6 Sonizophrenics (NORI) were matched ton 6 Schizophrenics (control) from a psychiatric hospital
• The rest of the Controls had no history of psychiatric ness and lone tarsing medication
• Procedure


  1. Both groups given connus performance mask (CPT) 10min before Beans time

  2. The task was to Chen 1 or 2 depending on autory & Visuus

  3. Had to Cuck mouse when they heard or saw 1

  4. This was done to well the activity of regions of brown respons, bie for impuise & Response Camrol

  5. Bos after CPT started they were injected with fieuroneouyswcore. (FOG)

  6. They did CPT for 32 min before transferred to PET Scan room

  7. Toon 10 Scans of brain using corneal peel & box technique
• Classic Evidence


  Bowlby 4+ thieves (1944)
• Methodology


  case Study, opportunity Sampling, marched pairs
• Children


  • From Child guidance clinic in London
  • 44 thieves + 44 non theres & Sample of morters to asses chulds history
  • Thieves 31 boys 13 gins aged 5-17-1
  • Control group from Same Clinic they cldn't Steal but were emotionally disturbed - were matched based on age, sex, IQ
• Thieves


  • Either Senious or tramntory problem
  • Steding was rated 6
  • 22 chidren grade 4
  • Stove for a long time (some 3 yrs)
  • 4 Children grade 1 only stove once
  • over have not convicted because they were too young
• IQ Scores


  60% 50% 85-114, 15 Scored higher, 2 beloo 85 theves
• Quasi-difference


  whether they stole or not
• DV


  whether they had 'affectioniess psychopathy
• Procedure


  1. Conducted be in 1936-39

  2. Children given mental tests to asses their intelligence & emotional attitude Recorded by psychologist

  3. Meanwhile Social worker interviewed childs mother to collect Preliminary Psychiatric history

  4. Social worker & Psychologise reported to psychiatuse (Bowlby) who nouewed mother & Child for 2hrs

  5. After a case Conference was held to pool impressions & information from Schools with other reports to form a provisional diagnosis

  6. Children met wann psycheainst weekly for 6 months while mother Spore to Social worker about problems
• Separation from mother


  • Being placed in tower homes due to parental split up
  • Spent Convent School & returned home at 5
  • Dereck B Hospitalised at 18 months for diphtheria, there for months and parents didn't visit
  • Kennem w Boween ages 2-9 yrs he was primarily cared for by his Grandparent who had no control over him
• 30/50 non-affections/delinquents experienced Separation
• 17 thieves had early Separation
• The other 27 had mothers who were anxious, irritable, oppressive & fussing unconscious
• 2 Fathers hated them & expressed this openly but this was also experienced by non-delinquents
• Juvenile delinquency caused by: poor housing, poverty + early experiences
• The data was collected routinely in treatments & shared retrospectively, so valid consent was difficult to obtain
• The study was conducted in 1936-39 but published in 1946, so the clinic team didn't use the data when the children were treated
• Opportunity Sampling


  Participants selected based on availability
• Independent measures


  Each participant is only exposed to one experimental condition
• The experiment was conducted at Washington University
• Experiment 1


  1. 45 participants split into 5 groups

  2. Shown 7 short clips of car crashes 5-30 seconds long

  3. Given a questionnaire & asked how fast the cars were going when they smashed/hit/bumped/contacted each other
• Experiment 2


  1. 150 participants split into 3 groups

  2. Shown the same car crash clips

  3. Asked if they saw any broken glass (which was not actually in the videos)
• The deception didn't cause psychological or physical harm
• This study is a review of existing research from 1980-1990