WHAT IS CLASSICAL CONDITIONING?

Learning: a relatively permanent change in behavior due to experience.

Classical conditioning: a procedure during which an animal or person learns to associate a reflex response with a new stimulus.

Classical conditioning schedule: the steps in the procedure to condition a new response.

Unconditioned stimulus (UCS): the stimulus that produces a reflex response, such as the food for Pavlov’s dog.

Unconditioned response (UCR): the reflex response to an unconditioned stimulus, such as Pavlov’s dog’s salivation.

Conditioned stimulus (CS): a new stimulus presented with the UCS, such as the bell in Pavlov’s experiment.

Conditioned response (CR): the response that is learnt; it now occurs when the CS is presented, such as Pavlov’s dog’s salivation.

Extinction: a conditioned response dies out.

Spontaneous recovery: a conditioned response that has disappeared suddenly appears again.

Generalization: the conditioned response is produced when a similar stimulus to the original conditioned stimulus is presented.

Discrimination: the conditioned response is only produced when a specific stimulus is presented.

Sampling method	Advantages	Disadvantages
Random	No researcher bias Likely to be representative	Time-consuming
Opportunity	Quick and easy	Not likely to be representative and may have researcher bias
Systematic	Simple procedure with no researcher bias	Sample may not be representative
Stratified	Very representative	Very time-consuming

WHAT ARE SAMPLING METHODS?

Random sample: every member of the target population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample.
Opportunity sampling: people who are members of the target population and are available and willing to take part.
Systematic sample: every ‘nth’ member of the target population is selected for the sample.
Stratified sample: to obtain this type of sample, the different subgroups in the target population are identified; then people are randomly selected from these subgroups in proportion to their numbers in the target population.

Seeing as my blog is looking extremely boring, even for a revision blog, I am going to be putting random pictures of people/ things every now and then. Yep.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF EXPERIMENTS

ADVANTAGES

§  The control of EVs in an experiment means it is easier to identify the cause and the effect. This means the experimenter can be more certain that it was the IV that affected the DV.

§  Experiments are controlled and standardized so they can be replicated by other researchers.

§  Experiments are objective because the procedures are set up in such a way that biases from the researcher are not present.

DISADVANTAGES

§  The settings for experiments can be very artificial. The tasks can be unrealistic. There can be a lack of ecological validity. It is possible to overcome this by using more natural settings for experiments.

§  Participants usually know they are in an experiment and this could affect the behavior they produce. The results could be untrue and misleading because the behavior was not normal.

Standardized procedures: a set order of carrying out a study that is applied to all participants when necessary.

Random allocation: a procedure for putting participants into conditions by chance.

Counterbalancing: a procedure for evening out the order in which participants complete both conditions of an experiment.

Extraneous variable (EV): a variable that is not the IV but might affect the DV if not controlled.

Control: making sure procedures are the same when necessary. Not controlling procedures leads to the possibility of extraneous variables occurring and confounding the results. 

Ecological validity: the results of the investigation can be said to apply to real-life behavior. They are an accurate account of behavior in the real world.

	ADVANTAGES	DISADVANTAGES
INDEPENDENT GROUPS	o   There are no order effects because people only take part in one condition. o   Often the same material can be used for the task in both conditions. o   Participants cannot work out the aim of the study because they only take part in one condition.	o   There are different people (participant variables) in the two conditions so that may be why the results are different. o   You need more people for the study. To get 10 in each group you need 20 people.
REPEATED MEASURES	o   The people in both conditions are the same so there are no participant variables. o   You only need 10 people to produce 20 results because each person produces two ‘scores’.	o   There are order effects as people have to do two tasks. o   You may need two tasks (they cannot learn the same list twice). o   Participants may work out the aim of the study because they take part in both conditions.
MATCHED PAIRS	o   Participant variables are reduced. o   There are no order effects. o   Often the same material can be used for the task in both conditions.	o   Matching is difficult, time-consuming, and not always successful. o   Some participant variables are still present.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

Ø  Independent groups: the available people for the experiment are divided into two groups. One group takes part in one of the conditions of the experiment and the other group takes part in the remaining condition. In the ‘music study’ experiment, one group of participants would learn with music present and the other group would learn without music present.

Ø  Repeated measures: there is one group of participants. The participants would take part in both conditions of the experiment. In the ‘music study’ experiment all participants would learn some material with music and they would also learn some material without music.

Ø  Matched pairs: the available people are tested before taking part and are matched for qualities into pairs. They could be identified at pair Aa, pair Bb, and so on. One member of the pair takes part in one condition of the experiment (A, B, C, etc) and the other member takes part in te remaining condition (a, b, c, etc). Identical twins are often considered to be perfect matched pairs in psychology research. 

WHAT IS THE EXPERIMENTAL METHOD?

Hypothesis: a testable statement about the relationship between two variables. In an experiment these variables are called the independent variable (IV) and the dependant variable (DV).
Variable: a factor or thing that can change – it varies.
Independent variable (IV): the variable that the researcher alters or manipulates in order to look for an effect on another variable. This variable produces the two conditions of the study.
Dependent variable (DV): the variable that the researcher measures in order to see if the IV has affected it.
Experiment: the method of research in which all variables other than the IV and DV are controlled. This allows the researcher to identify a cause-and-effect relationship between the IV and DV.
Condition: an experiment is usually organized so there are two trials, after which the performances of the participants are compared. These are the conditions of the experiment.

EVALUATION

Sherif
Sherif's method may have only been successful because his groups and the prejudice between them were artificially created. However, his method did show that if two groups work together to achieve a common goal, prejudice can be reduced.

Aronson
Aronson found that his jigsaw method did lead to prejudice between the racial groups being reduced. However, the positive perceptions of the other racial groups were not generalized outside of the classroom.

Elliot
Elliot's research could be considered unethical as the children suffered from psychological stress. However, when she contacted the students nine years later, they were more tolerant and showed more empathy towards others, than children who had not experienced her lesson.

Harwood
Information gathered from interviews are not always reliable. There are people who don't have regular contact with their grandparents and still have positive attitudes towards the elderly.

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION

Evidence from Sherif (1961)
After Sherif investigated prejudice amongst the groups, his next aim was to try and get them to become friends. He attempted this by arranging joint activities for them such as trips to the cinema and meals out. This did not work however and the boys continued to call each other names, etc. He then set up a situation where the truck got stuck in mud and needed help pulling out, otherwise they would all miss dinner. This was successful because the task could not be completed without help from everyone. Sherif concluded that cooperation on an important task is one way of reducing prejudice and discrimination. 


Evidence from Aronson (2000)
Aronson was given the task of eliminating prejudice amongst black and white students in a school in Texas. He developed a technique called the jigsaw method, which involved the students being in mixed-raced groups, each taking responsibility for a part of the lesson. They has to become experts on their part and then pass the information/ knowledge to another group of students within the class. The technique proved successful because each student was responsible for their own learning as well as that of others. Aronson interviewed the students afterwards and found that this method had:

• enhanced their self esteem
• increased their liking of their classmates
• improved their perceptions of other racial groups within the class

Jigsaw method: the name given to the technique used by Aronson to reduce prejudice within a group of mixed-race students.

Expert groups: another name fro the jigsaw method. Its called expert groups because each student had to become an expert on their particular topic and then they pass this information/ knowledge to the rest of their group.

Evidence from Elliott (1970)

The morning after Martin Luther King Jr. was killed, Jane Elliott was teaching a class of white, nine-year-olds. These children had never met anyone of a different color to themselves. She wanted to explain to them what happened the night before. She decided the only way to do this would be to explain to them how it feels to be judged by a physical appearance you have no control over. She decided to do this using the color of their eyes. She told her class that: blue-eyes children are smarter than those with brown eyes, brown-eyed children cannot use the drinking fountain, etc.

EXPLANATIONS OF PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION

• ·         ADORNO believes you are likely to be prejudiced if you are brought up by strict, critical parents and have an authoritarian personality.
• ·         SHERIF believes you are likely to be prejudiced if you are in competition with another group for scarce resources.
• ·         TAJFEL believes you are likely to be prejudiced because you favor your in-groups over your out-groups and believe our in-groups to be superior.

I may need to make revision cards later on from these. I think it would help me remember them more if I wrote them out by hand. Effort.

STUDY (IN-GROUPS/ OUT-GROUPS)

Tajfel (1970)
Aim: To show how easily people discriminate against their out-groups.
Method: 14-15-year-old-boys were randomly assigned to two groups. Each boy was given a game to play where he has to award pairs of points. They were told the point could be swapped for prizes at the end.
Results: The boys awarded points by choosing the pairings that created the biggest difference between the groups, not the pairings that gave them the most points.
Conclusion: People will discriminate against others just because they are members of an out-group.
Evaluation:

·         Tajfel used boys aged 14-15. Therefore results cannot be generalized to females of other ages.

·         The groups were artificially created so it doesn’t reflect real life. In real life, the groups we belong to mean something to us.

·         Other research, using participants of both sexes and all ages, has supported Tajfel’s findings. Just assigning people to groups is enough to get them to discriminate against each other.

waaah, so many studies to remember for prejudice and discrimination. it's only the aim's of the studies that i really keep forgetting.

STUDY (ROBBERS CAVE EXPERIMENT)

Sherif (1961)
Aim: To find out of prejudice develops when groups are in competition for scarce resources.
Method: An American summer camp was organized for 22 boys. The boys were randomly split into two teams and they were kept away from each other. They were not aware that the other team existed. The boys were given time to settle into their camps and form a group identity. After a while, the groups discovered each other and the camp staff introduced a series of competitions with the prize fore the winning team being a silver cup.
Results: Very quickly, the teams began unpleasant name calling each other and tried to attack each other.
Conclusion: Competition is a cause of prejudice.
Evaluation:

• ·         The groups and competitions are artificial so don’t necessarily reflect real life.
• ·         He used 12-year-old, middle-class, boys. The results cannot be generalized to other sexes, age groups or ethnicities.
• ·         The boys were American, cannot be generalized to other nationalities.
• ·         It has real-life implications. He study clearly demonstrated how quickly prejudice can arise between groups when they are competing for the same thing.

In-groups: a group of people you believe you have something in common with.
Out-group: a group of people whom you believe you have nothing in common with.

STUDY (AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY)

Adorno (1950)
Aim: To find out if there is a relationship between a person’s personality type and prejudiced beliefs.
Method: Hundreds of people were interviewed and tested using the F-scale.
Results: They found a relationship between personality traits and prejudiced beliefs.
Conclusion: There is an authoritarian personality and people with these characteristics are likely to be more prejudiced than others.
Evaluation:

• ·         The theory doesn’t explain why people are prejudiced towards some groups and not others.
• ·         There are some prejudiced people in society who didn’t grow up with strict or critical parents. Also, there are people in society who grew up with strict or critical parents but are not prejudiced.
• ·         The statements in the F-scale have been criticized. It is said that the statements were easier to agree with than disagree so they were not a reliable way of measuring people views.
• ·         The research was done in America so cannot be applied cross culturally.

FIRST POST.

Well hello, this is exciting i guess. I am solely going to be using this blog for revision purposes only though. Mainly psychology, maybe some science.

And so, the revision commences.