A useful blog

Kendra's psychology blog - this post is about doing psychology research write-ups.

Neurofeedback article

Tulving

Here is a link to a website about psychologist Endel Tulving:

Tulving website

The site & short video clip mostly talks about the difference between encoding and retrieval. Tulving is also known as one of the researchers who distinguished between episodic and semantic LTM (Tulving, 1972).

You may remember the study by Craik and Tulving (1975) which shows that a word (e.g. 'pig') is better encoded to LTM if you ask a meaningful question about it (e.g. is it a kind of animal?) rather than focussing on sound or appearance (e.g. does it rhyme with 'fig'?).

He also developed the encoding specificity principle, which states that cues to memory need to have some connection to the context in which something is learned. Recognition is usually easier than free recall, but can be harder when things are out of context (e.g. seeing your neighbour at a nightclub in Ibiza).

Poggendorff Illusion

A real 'classic' illusion, this is where people find it hard to judge whether the lines outside the rectangle/central stripe will meet or not.

The union jack flag allows for this effect by offsetting the lines of the Saint Patrick's Cross (the red diagonal lines) so that they appear to match up - when actually they don't:

Look at the white spaces (or check them with a ruler!)

Study skills article

Amazing article on study skills:

New York Times article

BBC memory article

Article about how memory changes with age:

Here

Welcome to the new S6 psychology!

Welcome

Hello! Welcome to Higher Psychology at Hutchie, I hope you enjoy the course, learn a lot and have a fun year.

Rather than give you yet another handout, I have put course information onto this blog. You can click on the label 'course info' (see the labels at the bottom of this post) to find all the info, or search for something specific using the box at the top.

A couple of general points here:

Course structure & assessment

This is a one-year crash higher. It is assessed by project work done in winter-spring, and an exam in the summer. You also need to pass internal assessments (NABs).

Homework

For each topic, you will be provided with a topic handout which includes homework assignments. You will be given deadlines for these assignments during the course - roughly one assignment per week.

Study materials

You should find a suitable way of taking and organising notes and handouts, such as filing them by topic in a large ring binder. You will be given a booklet for each topic, and you should also take notes in class. A jotter or loose A4 paper would be fine for this. Homework should be handed in on a separate sheet of paper (i.e. not your jotter), handwritten or printed, or can be emailed as an attachment. It is also strongly recommended that you implement a system of summarising your notes and handouts for revision purposes, perhaps using a separate notebook for this.

Textbook

Booklets will include a basic summary of each topic, but for full information on the topic you will need a suitable textbook. The recommended textbook for the course is ‘Higher Psychology’ by Williamson et al (2007).

Communication

It is essential for the smooth running of the class that you can be contacted by email, so please check your school email address regularly. You can contact me at firthj@hutchesons.org, or come and see me in room C8 (top floor, same floor as economics & art).

Dealing with anger - BBC news article

We have all felt like bashing our heads against brick walls when we cannot get what we want as a consumer. Conversely, many of us have suffered awkward customers. So how do we stop irritation boiling over into anger?

(Article link)

Procrastination

Good article from 'Psychology Today' - you can follow them on Facebook if you like this sort of thing:
Procrastination: ten things to know

The exam 2010

Well I just saw the exam paper and there were a couple of tough ones...

On the positive side, Memory, research methods and atypical behaviour were pretty predictable. I'd even go as far as to say the questions on memory were good!
I think the one on prejudice is one of the harder Qs to answer on this topic, but it was one of your homework questions so hopefully not any great shock to you! Looking at the other social psychology topics, they were tough too.
The worst in my opionion was stress - I wouldn't have expected the 2 questions to be only on fight/flight and transactional model - both smallish areas of the topic. Hope you managed to give a good account of yourselves!

Good luck with the rest of your exams, or if you are finished - congratulations!

Eyewitness Testimony

A new part of the topic of memory for 2009-10 is eyewitness testimony or 'EWT'.

The area draws heavily on the work of Bartlett, the first British professor of Psychology, who studied distortions in memory. Using folk stories and pictures, Bartlett (1932) found that memories were subject to things being omitted, added or changed, in order to fit with a person's expections and experience.

Loftus & Palmer (1974) showed videos of car crashes to students, and found that their estimates of speed depended on the wording of the question. This has implications for how accurate an eyewitness will be in a court room. But were they mis-remembering, or just responding to a leading question?

To test this, L&P showed another three groups of 50 students a car accident. As part of a series of questions, 1 group were asked about the car's speed when it 'smashed' into each other, the second group about the car's speed when it 'hit', and the final group were not asked about speed at all.

A week later they were asked if they had seen broken glass. Because this was not one of the original questions, the researchers didn't think participants could have been led to an answer (through response-bias). Instead, they had apparently remembered the accident as more severe than it actually was. Loftus & Palmer concluded that verbal information in the form of questions can merge with our memory of an event.

The car crash experiments were quite artificial, and Yuille & Cutshall (1986) studied a real-life robbery, finding that eyewitnesses showed accurate recall even three months later. A real life event can stick in your mind as a 'flashbulb memory'.

However, the documentary we view recently showed how distortions in eyewitness memory can impact on a real criminal case - see my previous post for the youtube links etc.

What factors affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony? I suggested a mnemonic to help with this: "I see"

I - Information after the event (like Loftus experiments)

S - Social pressure (like Asch length of lines expt - see textbook)

E - Expectations (Bartlett research which showed how things are distorted to fit expectations)

E - External appearance (Race, sex etc - this overlaps with the above).

(One other thing - a lot of the older blog posts may be useful, but be careful as some of them refer to topics such as memory strategies, intelligence etc that we didn't do this year, or info about the exam that has now changed).

Medical research 'underfunded'

News article about how mental health research is 'underfunded':

Article

An interesting point to consider - see the close parallels that are drawn between the way mental and physical illnesses are treated. The 'medical model' of atypical behaviour is an underlying assumption here.

Contact Hypothesis

It may seem like you have less to say on the Contact Hypothesis than on the other two theories of prejudice reduction (Education and Superordinate Goals).
So what about this mnemonic to help you remember the key factors which according to Allport (1954) are necessary for contact to work - 'SIDE':

- Superordinate goals - groups must have shared aims, goals, targets. If their aim is to harm each other then contact won't reduce prejudice.
- Institutions - institutions and laws in society must support integration. In Nazi Germany, the law supported prejudice against Jews.
- Differences - differences must be valued. You can't expect other groups to look or act the same as you, or adopt your customs.
- Equal status - groups must have equal status in society. So a high level of contact between slaves and slave owners did not lead to reduced prejudice.

(More morbidly, the mnemonic could also spell 'dies')

SIT and Americans

An article from 'The Onion'

http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-whos-116th-irish-proud-of-his-irish-heritage,103/

I think this shows that with social identity, it's not so much what you are, but groups you choose to identify with.

SQA info

Your source for key SQA documents like past papers, marking instructions, SQP etc:

http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/40964.html

Unit 2 exam question

Looking at past papers and the SQP, they tend to focus on a research example featuring a single method. Most methods have now come up in the last five years (2005: questionnaires with correlation; 2006: observation; 2007: case study; 2008: experiment; 2009: interviews).

It would be easy to assume that one of the methods from a few years ago will appear again this year, and that may well be the case. Correlation has been neglected a bit, so you should ensure that you are good on that (remember that corr is actually a data anlysis technique, not a method as such). Observation is a likely option too - 2006's research example was a naturalistic observation, so if I was an exam setter I might put in a participant observation this time.

One other possibility to bear in mind is that there could be a combination that hasn't been tried before. So for example, instead of having survey and correlation, maybe questions on correlation and experiments this year, or correlation and observation. For example, there could be a correlation research example, followed by questions on how a similar study could be done as an experiment instead.

With so many methods to choose from, it seems very unlikely is that interviews will come up again so soon. I also think case study is an unlikely choice, and shouldn't be top priority for your revision.

Here are the key points on the CAS for Section B:

• A research scenario (100–200 words) is provided in this section.


• A structured question, worth 20 marks, will be based on the research scenario. This
  question will consist of a set of 5–8 related parts, each part with a possible mark range of
  1–8 marks.


• Candidates are required to answer all parts of this question.


• The research scenario may be of an experimental or a non-experimental study.


• Candidates may be asked to suggest/evaluate a non-experimental or experimental
  alternative.


• Although no numerical calculations will be required in the exam, interpretation of given
  numerical or graphical data may be required.

Ref for the documentary we watched

The documentary we saw in class this morning featured a researcher called Wells... Below is a reference to one of his studies on using lineups to identify criminals. If you mention it in the exam of course you can just say 'Wells, 1998'.

For anyone who missed the class, the film is on two parts on youtube, here is the first bit:

Documentary part 1

It's an interesting story but also relevant - a lot of it supports a key conclusion of Loftus & Palmer (1974) i.e. that information after an event (in this case, the face of the innocent suspect) can be integrated into our memory of the event, resulting in false memories.

Reference

Wells, G.l., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R.S., Fulero, S.M., and Brimacombe, C.A.E. (1998). Eyewitness Identification Procedures: Recommendations for Lineups and Photospreads. Journal of Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603-647.

Some recent studies

A couple of interesting recent studies from the RD blog:

1) A topical one - phoning people up and reminding them of their responsibility to democracy doesn't make them more likely to vote, according to Nickerson & Rogers (2010), but asking them what time they will vote and what they will be doing beforehand was found to boost turnout by 9%.

2) It's easy to procrastinate, doing the most enjoyable tasks first and leaving the difficult ones. What's the best response to it? According to Wohl et al (2010), the best strategy is simply to forgive yourself for the time-wasting, and move on!

3) Kavetsos and Syzmanski (2010) found that the boost to mood of your country hosting a major sporting event (e.g. Olympics, World Cup) was "three times the size of the happiness boost associated with gaining a higher education; one and half times the happiness boost associated with getting married; and nearly large enough to offset the misery triggered by divorce". However unfortunately, this benefit only lasted a year before levels were back to normal.

4) Most usefully of all, Zhao et al (2010) studied how best to take a nap... Studying the effects of a 20 minute after-lunch nap, they found that the best option was to take a nap lying down. However, even a less-than-perfect position such as napping slumped forward on a desk had cognitive benefits.

References

Kavetsos, G., & Szymanski, S. (2010). National well-being and international sports events. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31 (2), 158-171

Nickerson DW, & Rogers T (2010). Do you have a voting plan?: implementation intentions, voter turnout, and organic plan making. Psychological science : a journal of the American Psychological Society / APS, 21 (2), 194-9

Wohl, M., Pychyl, T., & Bennett, S. (2010). I forgive myself, now I can study: How self-forgiveness for procrastinating can reduce future procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 48 (7), 803-808

Zhao, D., Zhang, Q., Fu, M., Tang, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2010). Effects of physical positions on sleep architectures and post-nap functions among habitual nappers. Biological Psychology, 83 (3), 207-213

Summary of changes to 2010 exam paper

Comparing past papers with what we have studied (and with the Specimen Question Paper), you will notice some changes. This is because 2009-10 is the first year of a slightly revised version of the Higher. Here are the main differences which affect you:

- Memory now features EWT, and memory improvement is no longer in the spec
- Atypical Behaviour used to be two topics but has now been combined into one
- Both Section C parts now have 20-mark essay questions

Section B is exactly the same. There are a few other minor changes to wording (added/or removed from topics) - if in doubt refer to what is in your booklets and you will be fine.

Chocolate? Coffee?

So as we were speaking about in class: chocolate and depression (or depression and chocolate!)

Chocolate news story

Plus I think I also mentioned the 'coffee makes you hallucinate' one:

Coffee news story

More on the origins and methodology of the F-Scale studies

Levinson & Sanford, two American researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, conducted research which aimed to understand the roots of anti-Semitism- prejudice against Jewish people, which had became particularly prominent due to the policies of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. They pioneered an anti-Semitism scale (the ‘A-S scale’), based on the psychoanalytic theory that prejudice was based on repression of one’s own undesirable characteristics, and projection of these onto an external target.

They found a strong relationship between attitudes towards minorities including Jews and Blacks, as well as ‘superpatriotism’). It was concluded that all of these findings stem from a common syndrome of ethnocentrism. However, a limitation is that the research assumed that participants were white and non-Jewish, as attitudes towards whites were not assessed.
After five revisions, the researchers produced the ethnocentrism scale (the ‘E scale’), containing statements about Jews, blacks, other minorities, and superpatriotism.

With funding from the American Jewish Committee, the study was broadened in the late 1940s. Two Austrian researchers, psychologist Frenkel-Brunswick & sociologist Adorno, joined Levinson and Sanford to study authoritarianism among American workers, and together they wrote the 1950 book, ‘The Authoritarian Personality’.

The theory suggested that the strict, repressive parenting of the Austrian middle-classes should result in high levels of authoritarianism. However, Frenkel-Brunswick conducted extensive interview-based research and found that high F-scores were common among lower social classes too, weakening this aspect of the theory.

Cronbach (1946) pointed out the problem of response set with the F-Scale, where it is hard to distinguish between respondents who agree with the content of the statements, and those who would agree to almost any item. He argued that this is most likely to occur when items are ambiguous, and some items in the F-scale are deliberately written to allow for projection (e.g. “The wild sex life of Romans…”).

To tackle this problem, Bass (1955) attempted a reversal of some items (so for example ‘familiarity breeds contempt’ was changed to ‘familiarity does not breed contempt’) and concluded that three fourths of the reliable variance on the F-scale is due to acquiescence.

Bass, B.M. (1955). Authoritarianism or acquiescence? Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 616-623.

Cronbach,L.J. (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 475-494.

Jane Elliot etc

We recently viewed the Jane Elliot 'A Class Divided' documentary, and discussed the ethics of simulating prejudice and discrimination with young children.

Interestingly a similar idea was recently done in a Scottish primary school, prompting a highly negative reaction:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8562798.stm

Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory states that a person’s sense of who they are base on their group membership(s). It originates from the research of Henri Tajfel. There are four main processes involved:

• People have a natural tendency to divide into conflicting groups.
• Our sense of who we are is based on membership of groups e.g. your job, what team you support, and this affects self-esteem.
• We make comparisons, and these are biased towards in-groups, and against out-groups.
• We like our groups to be distinctive from and superior to other groups.

So we divide the world up into ‘them and us’, we bind up our own identity with that of our group, and we make biased judgements in favour of that group. If we perceive that our own group is not different enough or superior enough we try to change that, either by helping our own group, or acting against the outgroup.

Tajfel believed that stereotyping is a normal cognitive process – we tend to group things together. In doing so, we tend to exaggerate the similarities of things within the group, and exaggerate the differences between groups. When applied to people, it leads to a group mentality. Prejudice comes about because for self-esteem to be maintained, our group needs to compare favourably with other groups. Once two groups identify themselves as rivals they are forced to compete in order for the members to maintain their self-esteem.

Tajfel’s work has made him the most influential social psychologist of the present day. The idea that our sense of self is in large part based on group membership has been fully adopted by mainstream social psychology.

However, SIT’s view of self-esteem as based on group membership seems simplistic, given the importance of other factors such as our skills, appearance and abilities. Rubin & Hewstone (1998) failed to find experimental support for the idea that intergroup discrimination elevates self-esteem or that low self-esteem motivates discrimination.

Authoritarian Personality Theory

Authoritarian Personality Theory

The idea of the Authoritarian Personality (AP) was formed in the aftermath of the Second World War, as Adorno and colleagues (1950) tried to explain the attraction of Fascism to certain types of people. Strongly influenced by Psychoanalysis as well as by the character and childhood histories of Hitler and other prominent Fascists and Nazis, the AP theory suggests that a harsh upbringing can lead to a warped personality that values authority very highly. This means not just that they will try to dominate others, but that they value the authorities e.g. government, church and despise anyone who is non-conventional.

The AP theory explains prejudice in that these character traits predict one's potential for fascist and antidemocratic leanings and behaviour. Therefore is explains prejudice mainly as an individual trait rather than as a force in society.

Adorno et al devised a personality scale called the F-Scale which measured attitudes towards authority, work, honour, sexuality and even the occult, asking for opinions on statements like, "People can be divided into two distinct classes: the weak and the strong". People who scored highly were said to have several key attributes, including:

• Conventionalism: rigid adherence to conventional values.
• Authoritarian Submission: submissive, uncritical attitude toward idealized moral authorities.
• Authoritarian Aggression: tendency to condemn & reject outgroups.
• Power and "Toughness": preoccupation with the dominance-submission, leader-follower dimension.
• Destructiveness and Cynicism: generalized hostility, vilification of the human.
• Sex: exaggerated concern with sexual "goings-on."

Later research by Altemeyer et al (1981) found that only the first three of these traits reliably correlate.

The theory become highly popular and well known, but soon began to be rejected by the scientific community (Scott, 1992). The F-Scale was shown to be unreliable, suffering from an ‘acquiescence response set’ – where people are more likely to agree than disagree with questionnaire questions. As all questions were phrased in such a way that an ‘agree’ answer was associated with a higher F-score, it may be that some participants just agreed to most or all without much thought.

The theory itself provided a description of a supposed personality type with out any clear explanation of how people become this way. It was complex, and has been largely superseded by the simpler ‘RWA’ (Right-wing authoritarian) model of Altemeyer. In focusing on personality, it also neglects the social aspects of prejudice.

Cognitive therapy

A couple of queries about cognitive therapy....


Philosophers such as Hume had suggested that emotions lead to thoughts. Cognitive primacy is an idea dating from the work of Magda Arnold in the 1960s, that it works the other way around: our thoughts come first, and our emotions follow. This was influential on the founders of CBT, Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck. Beck, for example, stated that there are three 'faulty views' which lead to depression: So Beck stated that 3 beliefs cause depression and therefore that thoughts come first, and emotion follows after. This 'cognitive triad' includes negative views of the self, negative views of the world and negative views of the future.

For example, a person fails an exam:

Negative view of self - "I'm a failure"
Negative view of the world - "Everyone is against me"
Negative view of the future - "I'll never be good at anything"

It is worth noting that this viewpoint links to theories of stress: Magda Arnold founded Appraisal Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appraisal_theory) which influenced Lazarus and Folkman's 'Transactional Model of Stress' (1984). The first two stages of this are are the appraisals of the stressor and the self. So again, thought processes are seen to come first, and emotions and behaviour (in this case stress) afterwards.

In reality it is not quite so simple... Schachter & Singer (1962) found that people assess their own emotional state in part by observing their own physiological state, e.g. by how fast their heart is beating. So the interaction between emotions, thoughts and physical states is complex and probably not one-way.

Sensory Memory

SM stands for sensory memory. It is the first stage of the multi-store model of memory. Information from the senses is stored very briefly in SM, before passing to STM if we pay attention to it.

SM is actually comprised of several stores, one for each sense. The best known are the iconic store (visual) which has a duration of around 0.5 seconds, and the echoic store (auditory/acoustic) which has a duration of around 2 seconds. These allow us to retain sights and sounds for long enough for us to tune in to them and start processing them.

A typical example of sensory memory is the way that even if we haven't been listening to someone, for example a teacher, we can still hear a kind of trace or echo in our head of what they said for a second or two, allowing us to pretend that we really were listening all along! This is the echoic store in action.