Comparisons in explaining behaviour

?
  • Created by: aisha_786
  • Created on: 18-08-17 12:01
View mindmap
  • Comparisons in explaining behaviour
    • Social
      • Obedience
        • S.I.T
          • (+) Research evidence supporting it. Milgram's variation studies (lab coat)
          • (-) Oversimplifies the interactions between individuals. Therefore the theory is reductionist
          • Supporting studies: Milgram's variation studies
        • Agency Theory
          • (+) Has practical application, can be used to understand historical genocides & atrocities
          • (-) Isn't credible as agency and autonomy can't be measured. Therefore, it can't be objectively tested
          • Supporting studies: Milgram's original experiment
      • Prejudice
        • Realistic Conflict Theory
          • (+)Provides a more complex explanation of how prejudice works
          • (-)There is evidence to prove that prejudice may occur without competition
          • Supporting studies: Serif's Robber caves (12 boys)
        • Social Identity Theory
          • (+) There's evidence to support the idea that social categorisationalone can cause prejudice to occur
          • (-) The theory doesn't take individual differences into account when explaining prejudice
          • Supporting studies: Tajfel &Turner
    • Cognitive
      • How memory is split up
        • MSM
          • (+) It provided a foundation for other research to take place investigating how memory is stored
          • (-) Lacks physical presence therefore it isn't scientific
        • Working Memory Model
          • (+) Has practical application as explanations for Alzheimer's patients
          • (-) Studies lack ecological validity as tasks involve mainly visual or sound but in reality we use both
      • How memory works
        • Episodic & Semantic memory
          • (+) Objective research (brain scans) show damage to the prefrontal cortex causes damage to semantic but not episodic. Therfore empirical data to prove they are stored separtely
          • (-) However HM and Clive Wearing show another store called procedural memory, suggesting there may be more other, more appropriate theories
        • Reconstructive memory
          • (+) Has research evidence that (Bartlett) shows people use schemas to fill in missing info in the story therefore is a good explanation .
          • (-)Lacks ecological validity because it  had little relevance to everyday memory so it is a bad explanation
    • Learning
      • Behaviour
        • Operant Conditioning
          • (+)  It is used in society with great effect. This suggests that it is a good way of explaining behaviour as it has observable outcomes that show it works.
          • (-) Operant conditioning does not consider biological factors such as the CNS, hormones, etc that could explain behaviour. This suggests that it is reductionist and therefore not a strong explanation.
        • Social Learning Theory
          • (+) SLT is credible as it has observable behaviour. It can also be researched in a way that illustrates a strong cause and effect relationship, suggesting that the theory is scientific.
          • (-) The mental processes of attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation are not directly observable, suggesting that the cognitive processes associated with SLT are not credible.
          • Supporting study: Bandura
        • Classical Conditioning
          • (+) Researching classical conditioning requires all extraneous variables to be controlled, allowing a strong cause and effect relationship to be determined as the outcome behaviour is observable and credible.
          • (-) There may be mental process and individual differences that may occur which dictate how an individual behaves, suggesting that classical conditioning may not be generalizable as an explanation of behaviour.
          • Supporting study: Pavlov
    • (...therefore this theory is/isn't a good explanation for...)
    • Biological: Aggression
      • Hormones
        • (+) Hormones are credible as they have physical subject matter therefore it is scientific
        • (-) Hormones reduce aggressive behaviour to the levels of hormones in the body and do not consider environmental impact on behaviour, suggesting that this explanation is reductionist.
      • Evolution and genes
        • (+) Evolution is more holistic as it acknowledges the role of the environment & cultural impacts in terms of the EEA & sexual selection
        • (-)

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Issues and Debates resources »