Evaluation of Physiological Approach

An evaluation of The Physiological Approach.

?

Evaluation of Physiological Approach

Advantages

  • This approach is considered very scientific. It is grounded in the hard science of biology, which uses objective, experimental methodology. For example, Maguire's research uses an MRI scanner, and the images are analysed using VBM and pixel counting. The use of these methods removes personal bias and subjectivity from the research.
  • This approach uses reliable research methods. For example, Sperry's research was conducted under controlled conditions, so that the functioning of each hemisphere could be investigated separately. Because of this, physiological studies are generally able to be replicated, achieving consistent findings, and personal bias and subjectivity are reduced or eliminated.
  • It provides strong arguments in favour of the 'nature' side of the nature / nurture debate. For example, in his study of lateralisation of brain function, Sperry showed that people are born with certain areas of the brain associated with certain functions. E.G. Language controlled in the Left Hemisphere.
  • This approach has contributed to psychologists' understanding of a wide range of phenomena. This can be seen in Sperry's study, where his research was able to identify the functions for which each hemisphere is responsible.

Disadvantages

  • The Physiological Approach can be considered reductionist, as it focuses on the biological, and ignores the influence of 'nurture,' and the role of cognition on human behaviour. This can be seen in Dement and Kleitman's study, where the complex, personal topic of dreaming is reduced to the scientific measurement of eye movements.
  • This approach often relies on laboratory experiments, which lacks ecological validity. For example, Dement and Kleitman's research on sleep and dreaming took place in a lab setting. Participants were required to sleep wired up to EEG machines and were woken at various stages in the night. Therefore the quality of their sleep was probably different from their normal sleep.

Evaluation

This approach is generally considered to be the 'most accepted' approach. It is very scientific and is part of the reason why psychology can be considered a valid science. Research done under this approach is often objective, scientific, valid and highly reliable. It contributes well to the 'nature' side of the nature / nurture debate. It has few limitations; as with any other approach, it can be considered reductionist. The main problem with this approach is that it lacks ecological validity, due to its laboratory settings.

Comments

No comments have yet been made