Issues + Debates

Free will VS determinism
Idiographic VS nomothetic
Ethical issues

Determinism
Hard determinism
Soft determinism
Bio determinism
Envrio determinism
Psychic determinsim
Free will

Behaviour governed by internal/external forces beyond our control
Behaviour is predictable

No free will at all

Behaviour constrained by enviro / bio but only to certain extent
We have some free will
Eg. SLT

Behaviour is innate
Determined by genes and bio
Eg. MAOA-L = more aggressive
Eg. Increased amygdala activity

Behaviour caused by enviro factors and previous experiences
Eg. behaviourism (classical + operant conditiong)
High expressed emotion = higher SCZ relapse

Behaviour caused by innate drives and unconscious psychodynamic conflicts that we can't control
Eg. frustration aggression

Complete control over behaviour and ability to make choices
Eg. humanism

Scientific emphasis on causal explanations
Lab experiments are ideal to establish cause and effect

+ Determinism = real life application
(- Not all treatments effective and therapies require motivation from patient)
- Excuses criminals
- No cognitive neuroscience support for free will
- Determinism is too simplistic

Cause and effect allows for treatment development
SSRIs for OCD (Soomro)
(- Not all treatments effective and therapies require motivation of patients so some free will involved)

Mobley killed pizza shop manager and claimed he was 'born to kill' due to violent family history
He was sentenced to death

Libert
Recorded motor activity in brain
Increased motor activity in brain before pp had conscious awareness of decision to move finger in task

Soft determinism is a better explanation
SLT = enviro determinism but mediating factors (motivation) provide free will

Idio = private
Focuses on individuals
Deep insight into behaviour by gathering qualitative data via case studies, interviews and thematic analysis
Eg. HM, KF, patient EVR, Little Albert

Nomos = law
High no. of ppl
Quantitative data
Develop general principles and universal laws that can be generalised
Eg. Peterson and Peterson, Bandura bobo doll, Skinner

+ Nomothetic = real life application
(- Too general)
+ Idiographic = explanatory power
(- Justifiable conclusions cannot be drawn about general laws of behaviour)
- Idiographic is subjective
(+ Somewhat scientific because they use many different forms of data to form more valid conclusions)
- Nomothetic-idiographic meaningless debate

General laws can help to treat mental disorders
Typical antipsychotics are effective for treating SCZ (Thornley)
Chlorpromazine
(- Too general. Treatments not effective for everyone)

Case studies help to refute/support theories and can lead to paradigm shifts
KF refuted MSM, led to WMM
(- Justifiable conclusions cannot be drawn about general laws of behaviour)

Qualitative
No control for comparison
(- Somewhat scientific because they use many different forms of data to form more valid conclusions)

Holt
They work together
General laws about WMM supported by Baddeley (N)
Refuted by patient EVR (I)

How research is presented in media
How research impacts public policy / certain groups in society
How research affects the pps in the study

Sieber and Stanley 1988
Research studies where there are potential social consequences for the pps/population that the results represent

1999
Due to its importance, psychologists should not shy away from socially sensitive research

Research Q
Method
Institutional context (how research is used and who funds it and why)
Interpretation and analysis of findings

+ Application
- Discrimination
- Bad impact
- Societal implication

Up to 1973, homosexuality = mental disorder in DSM
Kinsey
Interviewed 5000 men
Homosexuality = normal behaviour

Yerkes = black Americans have lower IQ
2000 involuntary sterilisations of black women in US

Burt = IQ is genetic and fixed
11+ grammar school system
Some pps made up

Milgram - obedience is situational
Mandel = offensive