Age – Poole and Lindsay
- Engaged children aged 3 to 8 in a science demonstration
- Parents of the children then read them a story which contained some elements of the science demonstration but also included normal information
- Children were then questioned about the science demonstration
- The children had incorporated information from the story into their original memory
- They were asked to think about where they had gotten this information
- Some of the older children revised their account of the science demonstration and extracted the post-event information
- Younger children didn’t do this
- High control – lab
- Lack of ecological validity
- Hard to make sure the children understood the instructions
- Informed consent for children is hard
Age – Fin et al
- Asked children and adults questions about an incident they had witnessed one day and then 5 months
- After one day recall from adults and children were similar
- 5 months – worse for children
Confabulation – list
- List of elements that could occur in a shoplifting incident
- Asked to rank them in importance
- Then showed a shoplifting videos included 8 elements
- Asked to recall
- Elements higher ranked were easy to recall
- Recalled ones that were not there
- Reliable
- Lacks ecological validity
- Wouldn’t be paying attention to the video
Cognitive interview
- Content reinstatement –weather, what you were thinking at the time
- Report everything
- Recall from a different perspective
- Recall in reverse order
Fisher et al
- Trained real detectives to use cognitive interview
- Increased the amount of information recalled
- High ecological validity
Milne and Bull
- Tested each of the cognitive techniques
- All four singly produced more information but context reinstatement ad report everything worked effectively together
Geiseman et al
- Showed a video of a simulated crime
- Recall in cognitive interview
- Cognitive interview prompted the most information
Memory improvement techniques
Method of Loci – visual
- identifying places your used to
- information into a mental image of a place
- Imagine walking in each place when recalling
- Triggers a memory allowing recall
Peg word system
- Linking words with numbers
- Mental associations between things to be remembered and those associated with numbers
Verbal
- Acronyms
- Rhymes
- Recall – triggers the memory
Attachment
Attachment – two people have an emotional link which ties them together
Bond – a set of feelings that ties one person to another
Maccoby (1980)
People have bonds by
- Seeking proximity
- Distress on separation
- Joy on reunion
- General orientation or behaviour towards the other person
Animal Attachment – first thing they see is their mother
Shaffer and Emerson (1964)
- Studied 60 babies in Glasgow
- Monthly visits for the first year then again at 18 months
- Focused on separation anxiety and stranger distress
- Showed separation anxiety within 6-8 months
- Fear of strangers followed after
- After the first attachment is formed – multiple attachments
- 65% with the mother 3% father 27% joint
- different methods of data
- ecological validity
- historical validity
- inducing stress to children
Classical conditioning – learning through association
Pavlov
- sounded a bell when feeding dogs
- began to salivate at the sound of the bell
UCS – unconditioned stimulus
UCR – unconditioned response
CS – conditioned stimulus
CR – conditioned response
Food (UCS) = Pleasure (UCR)
Food + mother (CS) = Pleasure (CR)
Criticisms of classical conditioning
Harlow
- study with monkeys
- monkeys spend more time with the surrogate who gave comfort
- went to cloth surrogate when scared
- proves food is not the main criteria for attachment
Shaffer and Emerson
- controlled observations
- not necessarily attached to the person who fed them
Operant conditioning – behaviour that provides a reward
Skinner
- rats would press a lever that supplied food
- repeat it to gain food
Positive and negative reinforcement
- Baby will cry when they are hungry or cold
- Mother will console/ feed them
- Behaviour is rewarding for the child
- Negative reinforcement for parent – repeat every time they cry
- Baby is likely to repeat crying for the reward
- Parent repeats to stop the crying
Social learning theory
Bandura
- Children and adults learn behaviour through observation and imitation
Hay and Vespo
- Parent acts as a role model for how to understand and carry out relationships
- Role modelling – show
- Direct instructions – teach
- Social facilitation – watch and help
- Importance of role models
- Hay & Vespo don’t deny important of innate influences but draws attention to development
- Doesn’t explain why attachments are emotionally intense for both people
Evolutionary theories
Bowlby
- Monotrophy – single attachment
- Innate drive to form attachment
- Critical period
- Internal working model – one attachment base for others (continuity hypothesis)
- Survival
- Social releases
Continuity hypothesis
Hazan and shaver
Love quiz – 620 replies
Securely attached
- Believe in love
- Mutual trust
- Less likely to be divorces
Insecurely attached
- Truelove is rare –fall out of love easily
- Relationships less easy
- More likely to be divorced
Secure adults
- Positive relationships
- Trust
- Positive image with mother being caring
Resistant adults
- Preoccupied by love
- Fall in love easily
- Conflicting images of mother
Avoidant
- Fearful of closeness
- Love is not durable
- Image of mother being rejecting
Mary Ainsworth
Strange situation – 100 middle class infants and their mother
- Mother and child in a room
- Stanger enters and talks with mother
- Stranger approaches child
- Mother leaves
- Mother enters stranger exits
- Mother leaves again
- Stranger enters
- Mother returns and stranger exits
- Identified 3 types
Type B – secure
- Willing to explore
- Separation anxiety
- Stanger anxiety
- Settled on return of mother
- 70%
Type A – Avoidant
- Stanger anxiety
- Separation anxiety
- Didn’t seek comfort on return
- 15%
Type C – Ambivalent
- Separation anxiety
- No stranger anxiety
- Angry at mother on return
- 15%
Conclusion
- Attachment differs on mothers sensitivity
- Sensitive mothers – secure babies
- Less sensitive – include attached
- Reliable – lab, highly controlled can repeat
- Useful – lots of information in a short time
- Supporting evidence – Hazan and Shaver – secure grew up socially and emotionally competent
- Interrater reliability – people interoperate things differently
- Lacks ecological validity - cannot generalise - class and small sample
- Ethical issues –stress on children
- Not all fit in the 3 types – main and Soloman type D (disorganised)
- Low population validity
- Low internal validity – one relationship – cannot base on whole attachment – Mundane realism
Cultural differences
Individualistic – encouraged to be independent
Collectivist – reliant on each other
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg
- Meta-analysis – lots of information 32 studies 8 countries
- Strange situation
- 2000 babies (large sample)
Type B – most common in all cultures
- Highest in GB and Sweden
- Lowest in China
- 70% of mothers work
Type A
- most common in Germany and other western counties
- rare in Israel and japan
- working mothers are rare encouraged Independence
Type C
- highest in china and japan
- lowest in Scandinavian countries
- children brought up in kibbuteim (closed community – don’t see strangers)
AO2
- large sample – generalise
- no direct ethical issues
- half in USA – population validity
- Strange situation developed in USA may not be suited to other cultures
Privation - no attachment made
Koluchova – Czech Twin boys
- Twin boys, starved, beaten care 18m-7yrs
- No speech and malnourished
- Adopted by two sisters
- Had average intelligence , happy and had emotional bonds
- Damage was repaired
- Against Bowlby
- Unique data
- Had each other to form the attachment
- Small sample - Cannot generalise
Skuze – two sisters, Louise and Mary
- Privation by mother
- Kept in small room – tied to the bed
- Prevented talking
- Put into care
- No speech, little evidence of play
- Louise – normal language at school at 5
- Mary – autistic school
- Louise was older and could have formed the bond with mother before Mary was born
- Cannot generalise – small sample
Institutions
Tizard & Hodges
- 65 children in a institution before 4m
- No attachments – 24 carers by the age of 2
- 25 returned to original family
- 33 adopted
- 7 stayed in care
- Follow up at 8 and 16yrs
- 4&8yrs – adopted did better – attachments formed
- 16yrs – adopted had close attachments and good relationships
- Restored children – less likely to be close to their family – rejecting
- Both groups had problems outside the home
- Against Bowlby – recovery is possible
- Adopted – more socially skilled – easy to form relationships
- Adopted family wanted them
- Restored family had same issues
- Lack of control – individual differences
- Participants dropped out
- Shows recovery is possible
Rutter et al – longitudinal – Romanian orphans
- In intuitions before 1-2 weeks
- Care was poor
- Adopted and compared with UK adopted
- 58 adopted early (6m)
- 59 adopted between 6-24m
- 48 late (2-4yr)
- All malnourished
- Marked disinhibition – likely in children who spent longer in the institutions
- Late adopted - most common MD (26%)
- Rare in UK children who were late adopted (3.8%)
- If they showed MD it would persist in half till age 6
- Supports Bowlby critical period
- Lots of ways to measure MD
- Difficult to obtain data
- Drop outs
Marked Disinhibition (MD)
- Attention seeking towards adult
- Inappropriate contact
- lack in checking back to parent
Recovery
Quality of care in institution – (Dontas) important for institution to form attachment
Age of child from privation – when removed young they will develop better – important for language development, less likely to develop language after 11\12yrs
Quality of care after – best placed in a supporting environment – form attachments
Follow on experiences later on in life – Quinton/rutter – two groups of women, 1\2 were in care. Care group likely to have breakdowns, criminal records and difficulties parenting their children
Deprivation – attachment made but separated
PDD
Protest
- Angry when parent leaves
- Clingy
Despair
- Anger subsides
- Withdrawn
- reject others comfort
Detachment
- Child engages with others but wary
- Reject care giver on return
Supported by Robertson and Robertson
- John went into care
- He tried to get attached to a nurse but they didn’t know his needs
- No routine and protection
- Became distressed
- Rejected mother on return
Long term separation
- Extreme clinginess – anticipation of separation
- Extreme separation – anxiety
- Detachment – refuse comfort and is very demanding
Factors affect separation
Age – STS strong at 12-18m, Schaffer and Calleder’s study showed children younger than 7m showed less upset than 12-18m
Type of attachment –Securely attached copes better with short term than ambivalent
Gender - boys respond more strongly to separation
Who they are left will – family member, they will cope better
Experience of past separation – positive will cope better
Day care
Anderson – studied social and cognitive progress of children attempting Swedish day care – children who went to day care are were better with other children and were more sociable and outgoing
Clarke – Stewart – compared 150 children who experienced different types of day care, nurseries had better social development than those looked after in a family setting
Schindler – studied 57 children, measured time spent alone and alongside others – positive correlation, co-operating with others makes them prosocial
Field et al – full time day care were more cooperative in play than part time
DiLalla – negative correlation, more hours in day care = less prosocial l- more about quality not quantity of time
Campbell et al
- Compared 18m and 3½ Swedish children to were in DC to home-raised children following them until 15
- Observing 3 naturally occurring conditions
- 9 family, 30 day care, 9 switching
- 3 ½ children who spent long days in nursery were less socially competent
- More days but less hours are more socially competent
- Generalise – in Sweden cannot generalise to other countries
How attachment research influenced childcare practices
- Child needs a secure attachment with an adult
- Child can have many attachments
- Child needs to use the attachment figure as a safe base – rely when scared or unhappy
Stress in day care
Steele (2001) – young children in the strange situation have raised levels of the stress hormone cortisol – stays 30m after reunion)
Watamura et al (2006) – cortisol levels in babies and toddlers increased on a day they has nursery but not when spent home
Greatest increases were 24-36m shy toddlers
Keyworker technique – Goldschmied & Jackson (1994)
- Significant adult for each child
- Used as an attachment figure when stressed
- Emotionally available to provide warmth and security
Campbell (2000)
Good quality structural characteristics
- Low adult to child ratio
- Small groups
- Mixed age groups
- Well trained staff – low staff turnover
Shaffer (1998) – when staff come and go = increase in fail to form attachment
Good quality process characteristics
- Secure attachment – stable figure who provides security and safety should be responsive and warm
- Structured day – activities have structure with play time group time – structured activities like drawing
Day-care aggression
Campbell
- Under 3 ½ years more negative interactions when they had long days in day-care
National institute of child health and development
- Large sample 4 ½ years
- Collected reports about children from parents, teachers and carers
- More time in day-care the greater problems they had
- Large sample
- Study in the US
- Unreliable data as they were from parents etc. - lie
Research methods
Aim - gives clear focus to the experiment
Experimental hypothesis – there is a clear direction (increase, decrease, improve etc.)
Non-directional hypothesis – not a clear direction (will be an effect)
Null hypothesis- prediction wrong (not be an effect)
Operationalising variables – how will you define and measure a specific variable used in the study
Reliability – two or more measurements or observations of the same event will be consistent with each other
Validity - we are measuring what we claim to measuring
Face Validity – does the test look as if it’s measuring what is supposed to be
Concurrent validity - comparing results from a new test to an old one
Predictive validity – predict performance on future tests
Independent variable – variable that the researcher manipulates
Dependent Variable - variable that has direct effect from the manipulation of IV
Control Variable - variable that needs to be kept the same throughout
Extraneous Variable – other variables other than the IV that will affect the DV
Random sampling – every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected
- Representative sample and has high population validity
Opportunity Sampling - consists of those people available to the researcher
- Biased leading to low population validity
Volunteer sampling - participants self-select, they volunteer to take part
- High chance of it being biased – cannot generalise to the target population leading to low population validity
BPS – British psychology society guidelines for research on humans
- Consent
- Deception
- Debriefing
- Withdrawal
- Confidentiality
- Protection
- Giving advice
- Colleagues – responsible if you see them doing something wrong
Deception: Menges, 80% not giving full information about the study
- Debriefing – telling the participants the true aim
- Retrospective informed consent – giving consent after debriefing is done
Informed consent – children under 16 – age means they may not fully understand what they are participating in
Protection of participants –
- Can withdraw
- Terminate any research that is to cause harm
- Debriefing
Experiments
Laboratory
- Researcher manipulates the IV to see effect on DV
- Takes place in high controlled conditions
- High levels of control on IV and EV’s
- Replicate
- Can infer cause and effect
- Artificial means low validity
- Investigator and participant effects
- Impossible to gain full consent because of potential demand characteristics
Field
- Manipulates IV to see effect on DV
- Natural setting
- Higher ecological validity than a lab
- Reduction participant effects (demand characteristics
- Can infer cause and effect
- Less control over EV’s
- Less control over participant sample
- Hard to replicate
- Time consuming to set up and carry out
- Consent, deception and right to withdraw are important as they may not think they are in an experiment
Natural
- Takes advantage of naturally occurring events to see effect on DV
- Useful where it would be unethical to manipulate IV
- High levels of ecological validity
- Lack of control on EV - low internal validity
- Less possible to infer cause and effect
- Less control on sample
- Hard to replicate or generalise as the event is usually a one-off
- Consent, right to withdraw and confidentiality are important
Correlation
- Technique for analysing data by measuring the strength of the relationship between 2 variables
- Positive – one increased other decreases
- Negative – one decreased other increases
- No correlation
- See the strength of a relationship between two variables
- Research things that would be unethical
- Cannot see cause and effect
- Only measure linear relationship (clear of negative correlation)
Counterbalancing - participants complete the experiment in one sequence (half to A then B other to B then A
Repeated measures
- Same participants used in each condition
- Fewer participants
- Order effects (tiredness, boredom)
- Demand characteristics
- Cannot use the same stimulus
- Order effects controlled through counterbalancing
Independent measures
- Randomly allocated to either conditions
- No order effects
- Reduce demand characteristics
- Use same stimulus
- Least effective for controlling participant variables
- More participants needed
Matched pairs
- Matched with somebody with similar characteristics, one in either conditions
- No order effects
- Good at controlling participant variables
- Hard to match
- More participants needed
Observations
Naturalistic
- Observes in participants environment
- No deliberate manipulation of variables
- High ecological validity
- Behave more naturally
- No control over EV’s
Controlled
- Observes in a controlled environment
- Involves manipulation of variables
- High control on EV’s
- Know they are being observed – lowers validity
Interviews
- Asks direct questions face to face
- Structured or unstructured
- Structured –
- data analysis straight forward
- less risk on investigator effects
- less training
- Interviewer able to clarify
- Cannot follow up interesting answers
- Formal
- Unstructured –
- Follow up issues
- Expand on answers
- More informal
- Interviewer effects
- Social desirability
- High levels of training
- Time consuming and expensive
- Hard to analyse qualitative data
Questionnaires
- Set of questions used to collect data from large samples
- Large samples, quick and cheap
- Large amounts of data
- Time efficient
- Reduced investigator effects
- Data easy analysed
- Social desirability/lack of honesty – low validity
- Postal surveys – low response
- Cannot explain confusing questions (ambiguous)
- Closed questions limit depth of response
- Questions open – difficult to analyse
Surveys
- Open questions
- Respondent can write their own answers – qualitative data
- Rich detailed data
- More realistic
- Hard to analyse
- Closed questions
- Choses answer from predetermined responses
- Quantitative data – easy to analyse
- Not realistic
- Losses richness and detail
- Cannot be clear if respondent understood
Case Study
- In depth study of an individual or group of people
- Rich data
- Ecological validity
- Suggest new hypothesis for further research
- Investigate topics which would be impractical/unethical to investigate experimentally
- Hard to replicate
- Hard to generalise
- Researcher could be biased
Measures of central tendency
Mean
- Statistical average
- Most sensitive, takes all scores into account
- Distorted by extreme values – unrepresentative of the data
Median
- Middle scores after data is ordered
- Unaffected by extreme values
- Doesn’t take all the values into account
Mode
- Most frequently occurring score
- Unaffected by extreme values
- Affected by change in one score making in unrepresented
Measures of dispersion
Range
- difference between highest and lowest
- Easy to calculate
- Distorted by extreme values
Standard deviation
- indicates the spread or dispersion of the data around central value
- All score into account
- Sensitive measure
- Hard to calculate
- Large – variation around the mean
- Small – data is closely clustered around the mean
- Zero – all values were the same