Individual Differences

HideShow resource information
Thigpen & Cleckley, focus?
MPD
1 of 39
Context?
No previous diagnostic criteria for MPD. Sceptical about whether even a real disorder.
2 of 39
Aim?
To document the psychotherapeutic treatment of a 35yr old women who has history of severe & blinding headaches & blackouts & who in therapy appeared to have MPD.
3 of 39
Research method?
Longitudinal case study
4 of 39
Sample?
1 female 'Eve White', 25yrd old American, 4 yr old daughter
5 of 39
x2 problems?
Researcher bias, only 1 case
6 of 39
Upheld ethics?
All
7 of 39
Broken?
Mental harm - experiencing childhood trauma
8 of 39
High EV?
Interviews of family
9 of 39
Low EV?
Using hipnosis o get info
10 of 39
Griffiths, focus?
Gambling behaviour
11 of 39
Background?
Illusion of control
12 of 39
IV?
RG or NRG, thinking aloud or not
13 of 39
DV?
total no. plays, total time spent playing, play rate, end stake, wins, wine rate for time, win rate for plays
14 of 39
Hypothesis?
No significant difference between levels of skill shown by R & NRG fruit machine gamblers.
15 of 39
Research method?
Field & Quasi experiment
16 of 39
Experimental design?
Independent groups desiign
17 of 39
Upheld ethics?
All
18 of 39
Broken?
Mental harm - embarrassed /disturbed when heard their verbalisations
19 of 39
x2 problems?
only 1 f RG, may miss info while observing
20 of 39
Rosenhan, focus?
insanity/ mental illness
21 of 39
Background?
Concerns over diagnostic system used by hospital staff to identify mental illness.
22 of 39
Research method?
Field experiment & pp observation.
23 of 39
Study 1 sample?
hospital staff & patients, 12 hospitals in USA across 5 states
24 of 39
Study 2 sample?
staff at a large hospital in USA
25 of 39
Conclusion?
R suggests we can't distinguish sane from insane in psychiatric hospitals.
26 of 39
Upheld ethics?
Experiment 2 - Consent, Withdraw. Both - Debrief, Confidentiality.
27 of 39
Broken?
Experiment 1 - Consent, withdraw, deception. Harm - physically abused, embarrassed
28 of 39
High EV?
real hospitals, staff & patients.
29 of 39
Low EV?
unusual to rate patients on likelihood of being fake
30 of 39
x2 problems?
biased data collection from pseudo's, 1973 USA.
31 of 39
Section C, main assumption?
Individuals differ in their behaviour & personal qualities so not everyone can be considered 'the average person'.
32 of 39
Implication?
It's important to study differences between people rather than things that we all have in common.
33 of 39
Similarity?
Griffiths & Rosenhan use field experiment.
34 of 39
Difference?
G uses larger sample than TC
35 of 39
Strength?
Allows psychologists to learn more about human behaviours because all behaviours, not just average ones, are studied.
36 of 39
Strength?
Allows psychologists to measure differences between individuals in qualities such as ersonality, intelligence, memory etc.
37 of 39
Weakness?
It creates divisions between people because individuals are identified (labelled) as being 'different'.
38 of 39
Weakness?
Tachniques used to measure differences are not fully objective and therefore open to bias.
39 of 39

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Context?

Back

No previous diagnostic criteria for MPD. Sceptical about whether even a real disorder.

Card 3

Front

Aim?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Research method?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Sample?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Psychology case studies resources »