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