Psychology SOS

Sunday, 9 November 2014

Discuss Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression including Infidelity and Jealousy (8 & 16 marks)

One evolutionary explanation claims that Jealousy causes aggression and a big cause of jealousy is cuckoldry. This is where a woman deceives her male partner into investing in offspring conceived with another male. Men have evolved mate-retention strategies driven by sexual jealousy to stop this from happening to them which often involve aggression.

Camilleri (2004) devised the cuckoldry risk hypothesis which says that men will be more willing to use sexually coercive tactics when there is a high risk of cuckoldry. This was backed up by Lalumiere (2005) who found that men carry out partner rape in order to decrease paternity uncertainty.

Buss and Shackelford (1997) conducted a study which supported the idea mate-retention strategies involving violence have evolved in men by looking into what mate-retention strategies occurred in married couples. Men reported a higher use of intrasexual threats than women who were more likely to use verbal possession signals. They also found that men with younger female partners used more mate-retention tactics including violence and threats. This shows that mate retention strategies are used to deter cuckoldry as men with younger female partners are most likely to use it and they are thought the most likely to commit cuckoldry.

Another supporting study was carried out into mate-retention strategies by Shackelford (2005) who used a survey method to ask males about how often they used mate-retention strategies and how often they used violent acts towards their partners. In support of the evolutionary explanations they found that a male’s use of mate-retention strategies and emotional manipulation correlated positively with their use of violence against their partners.

Shackelford’s study however had a huge metholodgical issue in the fact that his data found a correlational link. This therefore cannot show a causal relationship between mate-retention strategies and violence against women. Also a self-report method was used and so there is a chance that people could have given answers they thought were social desirable rather than truthful ones which reduces the validity of the study’s results.

Research into mate-retention also has a very useful real world application as use of these strategies can now alert families and friends to the fact that violence is a big possibility in the future and therefore it is more likely it can be stopped in advance of any violence occurring.

All research done into mate-retention strategies has a large gender bias as it has all been focused on males and usually on male-male and male-female mate retention and can therefore not be generalised to other situations.

Infidelity can also be the cause of violence and aggression in males. This is where voluntary sexual relations take place between a married individual and someone other than their partner. This when taken part in by a married woman can lead to cuckoldry as they then often expect their partner to invest in any offspring that occur from the infidelity. Camilleri and Quinsey (2009) supported Infidelity and cuckoldry leading to aggression and violence when they found that men convicted of partner rape where more likely to have experienced infidelity and/or cuckoldry prior to this occurring than those who were convicted of non-sexual partner abuse. This would support aggression as an evolutionary response as the males are trying to stop cuckoldry which would cause them to invest all their resources in another man’s genes rather than his own which would have been terrible for our ancestors in our EEA.

The evolutionary explanation also fails to say why some cultures require male violence for social status whereas in other cultures it damages this. If aggression was the result of evolution surly it would be universal which suggests that there may be more complex factors involved in aggression, such as genetic or neural factors rather than just evolutionary ones.

Outline and Evaluate Biological Treatments for Phobic Disorders (8 and 16 marks)

One Biological Treatment for Phobic disorders is Drugs. There are many types of drugs used to treat phobic disorders but the three main types are Benzodiazepines, Beta-blockers and Anti-depressants. Benzodiazepines work by slowing down you central nervous system by enhancing a neurotransmitter called GABA, Beta-blockers reduce levels and effects of adrenalin and noradrenaline so that thesympathomedullary pathway is less active and Anti-depressants reduce anxiety and increase serotonin which regulates mood and anxiety levels.

All of these are used as a treatment of the symptoms and not the cause of the phobia and should therefore be used in addition to psychological therapies and only in the short term whilst the causes are being treated. They are cheap compared to other treatments which make them a good option for a lot of people however they are highly addictive, especially Benzodiazepines, and can have a lot of side effects includingoften extensive and long term memory loss memory loss in Benzodiazepines and dizziness, blurred vision and increased suicide rates in Anti-depressants.

Kindt et al (2009) did a study to support the use of Beta-blockers by conditioning people to have a fear of spiders using electric shock and then giving half a Beta-blocker and half a placebo. 24 hours later those who had had the Beta-blocker showed a reduced fear response whereas those given the placebos did not. This supports the use of Beta-blockers as a treatment for Phobic disorders as it did reduce the fear response the participants had to spider when the placebo didn’t suggesting it was actually the Beta-blocker that had reduced this fear and not another variable.

There are some ethical issues involved in Kindt’s study as there is an issue of informed consent as most participants were not informed of the comparative success of the Beta-blockers verses placebos and therefore expose themselves to possible side effects unknowingly.

Another Biological treatment of Phobic Disorders is Psychosurgery. This is a type of surgery done on the brain to treat mental health problems such as phobic disorders and usually involves severing connections between areas of the brain to encourage it to create new pathways. It is used as a last resort when all other means of treatment have been tried but had no effect and has had some success on patients for whom all else has failed and whose mental health condition is life threatening. However the surgery is very dangerous and can cause memory loss and therefore is only used in extreme cases.

Ruck et al (2003) did a study to support psychosurgery where he gave psychosurgery to 26 people who had been suffering from non-obsessive anxiety disorders for more than 5 years and who had tried various other treatments. A year later 25 out of 26 of the people had dropped from an average of 22.0 to an average of 4.6 on the brief anxiety scale. This would support psychosurgery as a treatment for phobic disorders as it worked as a last resort for 95% of the participants.

However although this study seems to support psychosurgery one year after treatment 7 of the participants had tried to commit suicide and 2 had epileptic fits. This suggests that although psychosurgery may be a working treatment it also carries lots of risks, especially of side effects that must be thought about before taking part in the procedure.

There are a lot of ethical issues involved in psychosurgery as it is totally irreversible. Also informed consent is very hard to get as people can never really be fully informed on the effects of psychosurgery as it is different in each individual case.

Outline and Evaluate Psychological Therapies for Phobic Disorders (8 and 16 marks)

One Psychological Therapy for Phobic Disorders is Systematic Desensitisation (SD). Wolpe (1958) developed SD where you come up with a hierarchy of fear (levels of acceptable exposure) and are gradually exposed to your phobia in accordance to these levels. Before being exposed to your phobia relaxation techniques are learnt to be used during exposure. SD aims to replace fear response with calm andrelaxation.

Systematic Desensitisation is good because it is relatively quick compared to other psychological and biological therapies and there are no side effects that come with it. It can also be self-administered meaning it can cost very little money. However if a therapist is used it can end up being quite expensive.

Research into SD was done by Masserman (1943) who conditioned a fear reponse to a box in cats by electric shocking them in the box. He then tried to reduce this fear by feeding them in this box and found that he could reduce it by forming new associations with the box. This would have supported SD as a therapy for Phobic Disorders as it shows that fear of something can be replaced, in the case of SD it would be with relaxation. However subsequent research found that this is not so much the case in humans as it is in cats as fear is not as simple as a conditioned association in humans and expectations contribute less to fear in cats than in humans. Therefore we cannot generalise the findings of Masserman’sstudy to humans as it has been shown we have a different psychological makeup regarding fear.

A study which supported SD was carried out by Jones (1924) who tried to cure a 3 year old boy, Little Peter, of his fear of white rabbits. She did this by moving a white rabbit closer and closer to him as he ate each day. Through this his fear of white rabbits gradually went away. This supports SD as a therapy for Phobic Disorders as increased exposure of the Phobia eventually cured it.

Another supporting study of SD was conducted byCapafons (1998) where he used SD treatment on 21 patients from a volunteer sample to try to cure them of aerophobia. They reported levels of fear during the 12-15 week period of two hour sessions a week by a self-report method. He found that by the end all but two patients reported lower fear levels. This supports SD as a therapy for Phobic Disorders as 90% of participants reported less fear after receiving SD.

However Capafons’s study did use a self-report method which reduces the validity as participants could have given answers they thought Capafons wanted to hear rather than truthful ones. This needs to be taken into account when using the results from Capafons study so that conclusions are not built on only invalid evidence. To stop this lots of studies should be looked at together and their result collated when looking into whether SD is an effective therapy for Phobic Disorders.

Another Psychological Theory for Phobic Disorders is Rational Emotive Behavioural Therapy (REBT). REBT was developed by Ellis (1950’s) and aims to replace irrational thought patterns with rational ones. It says that the Phobia itself is not the problem but the irrational thoughts that develop and are associated with the phobia. He developed an ABC model to help identify these irrational thoughts:

A – Activating Event (eg. A friend ignores you in the street)

B – Irrational Beliefs (eg. You think he has decided he doesn’t like you and that no one else will and that you are worthless)

C – Consequences (eg. You avoid social situations in the future)

It was also said that the acting events that cause unproductive consequences, but the beliefs that lead to the self-defeating consequences. Because of this REBT focuses on challenging or disputing these beliefs and replacing them with effective rational beliefs instead such as; Logical disputing (self-defeating thoughts do not flow logically from the information available), Empirical disputing (Self-defeating thoughts may not be consistent with reality), and Pragmatic disputing (Emphasise the lack of usefulness of self-defeating beliefs).

The National Institute of Clinical Excellence claimed that REBT should be the first line of defence for treating phobic disorders and Ellis claimed it had a 90% success rate however it require a lot of time and commitment from the patient as it is a weekly session and takes on average 27 sessions to cure a phobia therefore making it quite expensive.

Discuss Psychological Explanations of Phobic Disorders (8 and 16 marks)

One Psychological explanation for Phobic Disorders is the Behavioural approach which says that phobias are acquired through conditioning. Classical conditioning (or learning through association) first conditions that phobia by associating a fear response with a neutral object/situation. Operant conditioning (or learning through reinforcement) then reinforces this fear response by reinforcing the fact that no fear response is apparent when that situation/object is avoided. Extreme phobias can also be learnt through Social Learning Theory which says we learn through observation and therefore would acquire a phobia of an object/situation as we see someone else doing the same.

Supporting Research into the Behavioural approach as an explanation for phobic disorders was carried out by Watson and Rayner (1920) who worked with 11 month old ‘Little Albert’ who at the beginning showed no fear response to a series of white fluffy objects. Every time Albert reached for one of the white fluffy objects they would make a very loud noise to startle him. Over time Albert began to cry when faced with white fluffy objects and had a fear response towards them that was not there before. This would support the behavioural approach as an explanation for phobic disorders as it shows that a phobia of a completely neutral object can in fact be learnt.

One positive of the Behavioural approach is that it can account for cultural differences and therefore is more culturally sound than other approaches, such as the psychodynamic approach, as each society has its own culturally specific role models which influence which phobias might be acquired.

Another Psychological explanation for phobic disorders is the Cognitive approach. This says that phobias develop as the consequence of irrational thinking. Beck et al (1985) proposed that phobias occur because people become afraid of situations where fears may occur. He also said that people tend to overestimate their fear, increasing the likelihood of it developing to a phobia.

If Phobic Disorders was a cognitive process it should be treatable through a cognitive behavioural therapy, in the case of Phobias, Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT).The National Institute of Clinical Excellence claimed that REBT should be the first line of defence for treating phobic disorders and Ellis claimed it had a 90% success rate. This supports the cognitive approach as an explanation for phobic disorders as it is very treatable through a cognitive process suggesting that this is the basis for it forming in the first place.

A study was conducted by Gournay (1989) conducted a study to support the cognitive approach and found that phobics were more likely than normal people to overestimate risks meaning they are generally more fearful and resulting in them developing phobias a lot easier. This supports the cognitive approach as an explanation for phobic disorders as it shows that those who have an irrational thought meaning they are more fearful are the people who then develop a phobia, not those who do not have irrational thoughts.

One Criticism of the cognitive approach is that it is deterministic as it states that if you have dysfunctional thoughts you WILL become a phobic which is a very narrow view and forgets about us having the free will to choose.

Discuss Biological Explanations for Phobic Disorders (8 and 16 marks)

One Biological explanation for phobic disorders is the Evolutionary Approach. This says that some stimuli are more likely to be feared than others eg. Snakes, heights etc. as these are the stimuli that would have been dangerous and fearful to our ancestors in our Environment of Evolutionary Adaptation (EEA). We have adapted to be fearful of these stimuli as potential threats rather than after an event has happened which gave our ancestors the best chance of survival and to pass on their genes. We are also said to be biologically prepared to rapidly learn an association between particular stimuli and fear from the minute we are born, copying the fear response shown in our parents and learning this ourselves.

Ohman and Soares (1994) conducted a study to support the idea that we fear stimuli as a potential threat rather than after an event occurs by showing a group of participants ‘Masked’ pictures (so they could not fully tell what the object was) of Snakes and Spiders. A higher autonomic nervous system arousal was found in those who had a fear of snakes and spiders when they got shown the masked picture compared to when shown the full picture or compared to that of a participant without a fear of the particular animal. This supports the idea that we have adapted to have a fear of a stimuli as a potential threat as participants were more scared when they were not sure of what the picture was than when they knew exactly what it was.

Another biological explanation of phobic disorders is Genetic Factors. This says that it may be that people inherit an over sensitive fear response to particular stimuli causing them to develop a phobia of that fear response. This can be looked into using both Twin and Family Studies. In Twin studies comparisons are made between the individuals in both Monozygotic (MZ) twins and dizygotic (DZ) twins and then comparing these results between the sets of twins. If the MZ twins show a more similar fear response than DZ twins it suggests that there is in fact a genetic factor in Phobic Disorders whereas if it is in fact the other way round this suggests there is not a genetic factor. Family studies are more general and look at whether or not relatives within the same family have same of similar phobias.

One criticism of genetic factors as an explanation for phobic disorders is that it is very on the side of nature in the nature/nurture debate which means that it ignores theories such as Social Learning Theory which would stress the nurture side. This can be a criticism as both Nature and Nurture are said to be important to explaining Phobic disorders. However when researching genetic factors through twin studies both sides of the nature/nurture debate are being looked into which means if there was more of a nurture factor in phobic disorders than a nature factor it would still be discovered.

Solyom et al (1974) conducted a study to support genetic factors as an explanation for phobic disorders and found that 45% of patients with a phobic disorder had at least one relative with the same disorder compared to only 17% of the non-phobic controls. This supports a genetic basis for phobic disorders as it shows that it is in fact very common for relatives to have the same phobia.

Both Biological Explanations of Phobic Disorder can be seen to be deterministic as they assume that how we act is down to just either our genes or evolutionary factors and suggest that we have no free will to develop phobic disorders of stimuli we have had our own personal bad experiences with. This is a criticism as it is very one sided and therefore should be looked at alongside theories such as Social Learning Theory which would say that we learn phobic disorders through observing someone else’s fear and replicating this.

Discuss Issues Associated with the Classification and/or Diagnosis of Phobic Disorders (24 marks)

One issue with diagnosing Phobic Disorders is Reliability. This is the consistency of a measuring instruments such as a questionnaire or scale. Internal Reliability is the extent to which a measure is consistent within itself and can be assessed using the split-half method which involves splitting the test I two and having the same participant do both halves of the test and then seeing how similar they are. External reliability is the extent to which a measure varies from one use to another and can be assessed using the test retest method which involves testing the same participant twice in the same test over a period of time and seeing whether the scores were similar. Inter-rater reliability is a way of testing external validity which involves comparing the ratings of two or more observers and checking for agreement in their measurements, it can be also used for interviews.

Reliability can be improved through the use of computerised scales. Kobak et al (1993) suggested that increased reliability occurs because there is less opportunity for the experimenter to affect the given answers. Also it helps with things such as people with social phobias as they may prefer to answer without the presence of a person in the room.

Kendler et al (1999) did a study which undermines the research into the classification and diagnosis of phobic disorders by using face to face and telephone interviews to diagnose phobias over one month and then eight years. He found that test-retest reliability for diagnosing phobic disorders was quite low and decreased with time. He thought this to be because of participant’s level of recall of past phobias. This undermines the reliability of research into the classification and diagnosis of phobic disorders because it shows that it is difficult to be confident in the research as it has such low reliability.

The reliability of Kendler’s study was also low because inter rater reliability because it was suggested that different clinicians made different decisions about the severity of symptoms in some phobias. This would reduce the reliability of the classification and diagnosis of phobic disorders as if each clinician sees the severity of symptoms as different they are likely to also classify and diagnose people differently.

Validity is also an issue in the classification and diagnosis of phobic disorders. Validity is the extent to which the diagnosis represents something that is real and distinct from other disorders and the extent that a classification measures what it claims to measure. There are three things that are measured within validity; Comorbidity which refers to the extent that two or more conditions co-occur, Concurrent Validity which establishes the value of a new measure of phobic symptoms by correlating it with an existing one, and Construct Validity which measures the extent that a test really does measure a target construct of phobias.

Eysnck (1997) supported comorbidity in diagnosing phobic disorders by finding that 66% of patients with one anxiety disorder are diagnosed with another. He says that because of this we should just say these people have an ‘anxiety disorder’ rather than many specific phobic disorders.This would support comorbidity in phobic disorders as it shows that phobic disorders do co-occur in many people.

Validity is also affected by cultural factors as some cultures have unique fears which could be seen as abnormal by other cultures. An example of this is Japan. They have a very different culture to ours and have a culture bound social phobia of embarrassing others in public which is diagnosed in Japan only. This shows the cultural differences on classifying and diagnosing phobias as if someone was to have this phobia in a western culture it would never be diagnosed.

Intense Fandom: Celeb Stalking (10 marks)

Most people admire celebrities in some form or another and this tends to be completely harmless and sometimes even beneficial for people. However sometimes this goes further than just admiration and can result in obsession or intense fandom. Celebrity Stalking is one form of this.

Attachment Style, especially in childhood, is said to have a big effect on someone’s likelihood to stalk a celebrity. It has been suggested that the poorer someone’s attachment style was, the more likely they are to stalk someone as they want a relationship with that celeb that cannot cause the rejection they felt in childhood. Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) proposed a model of adult attachment styles based on your internal working model, one of which, ‘pre-occupied’, is also linked to celebrity stalking. Those with this attachment type have a poor self-image and positive image of others and therefore seek approval from these people.

Tonin conducted a study to support the fact that someone’s likelihood of celebrity staking is affected by their attachment in both childhood and adulthood by measuring both participant’s childhood and adult attachment using two different self-repot measures. She then compared sectioned stalkers, to sectioned non stalkers and a non-sectioned group. She found that the group of stalkers had significantly more evidence of both childhood insecure attachment and insecure adult attachment than in the control groups. This supports the fact that attachment affects someone’s likelihood to stalk a celeb as it shows that insecure attachment is linked to stalking.

This study can be criticised however as the results found were only correlational and therefore cannot show a cause and effect relationship between Celeb worship and individuality. It was also a self-report method which means that demand characteristics could have been apparent in the participants and they could have given answers they thought were socially desirable rather than truthful ones. This means that any conclusions drawn from this study could be based on untruthful evidence.

It has also been claimed that the tendency to engage in stalking could be an indicator of some underlying psychopathology. Maltby (2006) supported this claim by finding that scores on a measure of OCD correlated significantly with both the Borderline-Pathological and Intense-Personal levels of the Absorption Addiction Model measured by the Celebrity Attitude Scale, and also those stalkers often behave irrationally towards their victims in ways that would suggest underlying pathological issues.

Intense Fandom: Celeb Worship (10 marks)

One Model which can explain Celebrity Worship is the absorption addiction Model (AAM) which was put forward by McCutcheon et al (2002) and it applies to people with a weak sense of individuality and those who feel they are lacing something in their life. IT consists of three stages; ‘Entertainment-Social’, which is the least intense form of celeb worship where people worship celebs because of their entertainment value, ‘Intense-Personal’ where fans show compulsive and intense behaviour towards a celeb, and ‘Borderline-Pathological’ which is the most extreme form of celeb worship and fans start to have irrational and uncontrollable behaviours towards a celeb.

Houran, Navik and Zerrusen conducted a study to support the AAM as a model for Celeb worship by having 140 US College students complete the Celebrity Attitude Scale (CAS), a scale where high scores indicate over identification and obsession with celebs. They found that high scores on the CAS were associated with identity diffusion and poor interpersonal boundaries supporting the fact that through the AAM those with a weak sense of individuality are most likely to form intense fandom in the form of celeb worship.

Religion can also have an effect on Intense Fandom in the form of Celebrity Worship. In Christianity Especially in the 10 commandments it is said that it is forbid to worship anyone but God. Maltby et al (2002) conducted a study to see if this had an effect on a Christian’s likelihood to worship a celeb by comparing participant’s scores on a score of religiosity and on the CAS. They found that as religiosity increased the tendency to worship celebrities decreased. This supports the fact that Religion can have an effect on Intense Fandom however research has only been carried out on Christianity and therefore results cannot be generalised to other religions.

Saturday, 8 November 2014

Evolutionary Explanations of the attraction of Celebs (10 marks)

One Evolutionary Explanation of the attraction of celebs is through the attraction to creative individuals. This says that in our EEA a female would have looked for a mate who showed the most creative displays of behaviour, this has adapted to the present day and we now look for people who are creative in the form of art, music, humour etc. and we are attracted to celebs as they tend to possess a lot of these creative talents that we want so much.

Darwin conducted a study to support the attraction of creative individuals by looking at birds and finding that female birds were most attracted to the males with the most complex songs. This finding was then used by other researchers to justify how people are attracted to creative individuals. Duck used Darwin’s findings and related it to humans in another supporting study and found that relationships between people tend to last longer if there is creativity and cognitive variety within the relationship as boredom is a big factor for terminating a relationship and creativity gets rid of a lot of boredom. This supports attraction to creative individuals as evolutionary explanation of the attraction of celebs as it shows that we are in fact drawn to the most creative people, lots of these being celebs and therefore people are attracted to celebs to combat boredom with their creativity.

However this theory can be seen to be deterministic as it suggests that our interest in celebs is not within our own control and ignores our own free will. It also cannot explain things like why younger people are more attracted to celebs than older people.

Another evolutionary explanation of the attraction of celebs is Celebrity Gossip. This says that we are attracted to celebs in order to have something to talk about and bond over with people in our group that people from other groups ‘wouldn’t understand’. This has evolved from people in or EEA exchanging social information within their own group.

DeBacker (2007) conducted a study to support Celeb Gossip by surveying 800 participants and finding that the majority of participants saw gossip as a useful way of acquiring information about social group members; media exposure was a strong predictor of interest in celebs.DeBacker concluded that media exposure could lead us to the misbelief that celebs were actually a part of our group therefore we would want to gossip about them to find things out about them just as we would with other members within our social group.

A criticism of evolutionary explanations of the attraction of celebs is that it is very on the side of nature in the nature/nurture debate which means it ignores explanations such as social-psychological explanations which explain the side of nurture. This is a criticism as both nature and nurture have been found to be important in explaining the attraction of celebs so without the nurture side it can never fully explainthe attraction of celebs.

Social Psychological Explanations of Attraction of Celebs (10 marks)

One Social-Psychological Explanation for the Attraction of Celebs is the ‘Absorption-Addiction Model’ (AAM) which says that people follow celebs because they lack something in their own life so use this as a way of escape but most people never go beyond admiring celebs because of their entertainment or social value, however in some people this can lead to addiction with certain celebs. Giles and Maltbycame up with three stages of this process:

Entertainment-Social – Fans are attracted because of their ability to entertain and they become a source of gossip

Intense-Personal – Intense and Compulsive feelings for the celeb develop and obsessive tendencies

Borderline-Pathological – Uncontrollable Behaviour and fantasies about celebs occur

A supporting study was carried out into the AAM by Malty (2003) who looked at the link between mental health and the three levels of the AAM. He used the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire to assess the relationship between levels of Celeb attraction and personality. He found that Intense-Personal was linked to neuroticism. This would support the AAM as neuroticism is linked to anxiety and depression which could be the reason for someone moving up the levels of the AAM to try and find that escape and fulfil what they are lacing in their own life.

However this study was carried out using a self-report method which means that participants could have shown demand characteristics and given answers which they thought were socially desirable rather than truthful ones meaning any conclusions drawn from this study could be based on untruthful evidence.

Another Social psychological explanation for theattraction of celebs is Parasocial Relationships. Parasocial relationships are where and individual is attracted to another individual who has no idea that they exist. An individual who had poor attachment as a child is more likely to form a parasocial relationship as it is easier to form an attachment with a celeb as there is no risk of rejection.

Schiappa et al (2007) conducted a study to support Parasocial Relationships by doing a meta-analysis of studies into parasocial relationships. It was concluded that parasocial relationships were more likely to form with someone attractive and similar to the individual forming it. This supports Parasocial relationships as an explanation of the attraction of celebs as it shows that people look for the same thing in a parasocial relationship that they would in a relationship as they want a real relationship but are less likely to get rejected through a parasocial one suggesting poor attachment as a child.

There is a big cultural bias in the majority of research into social psychological explanations of attraction of celebs as research focuses on celebs in the media which is a mostly western concept and therefore more research is carried out on western cultures meaning we cannot generalise the results to other non-western cultures.

Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion (10 marks)

One model of persuasion is the elaboration likelihood model which suggests two routes to persuasive communication depending on whether the audience is likely to focus on the message itself of on other factors surrounding the message.

The First route, The Central Route, focuses on the message itself and requires the audience to really think about what is trying to be put across to them. Therefore the message must be put across convincingly and it is more likely to be effective when the message is personal or important such as a charity appeal. The second route, The Peripheral route, focuses on the content of the message rather than the message itself and does not require the audience to think about the message as much. This involves things such as celebrity advertisement and is more likely to e used when the message is less important such as a sales advert.

Petty and Cacioppo (1981) say that people differ in their need to know more about a topic based on facts or ‘need for cognition’. Those who have a high need for cognition are more likely to be persuaded using a central route and those with a low need for cognition more likely to be persuaded using a peripheral route.

Vidrine et al (2007) supported peoples different need for cognition by exposing them to either a fact-based (central route) or emotion-based (peripheral route) smoking risk campaign. It was found that those with a higher need for cognition were more influenced by the fact-based message whereas those with a low need for cognition were more affected by the emotion-based message. This supports the Elaboration-Likelihood Model for persuasion as it shows that people are more influenced by different messages supporting the need for two different routes.

A criticism of the ELM however is that it is oversimplified as it assumes that the two routes do not occur at the same time, but Benoit (2008) suggested that two routes can be processed at the same time and overlap each other and that you can be both thinking about the message and thinking about the context of the message both at the same time. It is also a very westernised model which may not apply to the persuasive effects of the media in other cultures.

Although it can be praised for taking into account peoples free will and individual differences and recognises that similar messages can be processed differently by different people which a lot of models, such as the Hovlnd-Yale Model, fail to take into account.

Hovland-Yale Model (10 marks)

One model of persuasion through the media is the Hovland-Yale Model which says that three factors affect the communication process that influences persuasion; The Communicator, The Message and The audience.

The Communicator is ‘who is passing on the message’ and it has been said that the more attractive, well known and knowledgeable in the specific area the communicator is, the more people are persuaded. Sorokin and Baldyreff supported this by having participants listen to two identical records. A good looking ‘expert’ in the field told participants that one was better than the other and it was found that 59% of people agreed with them even though they had just listened to two identical pieces suggesting the only reason they thought this was that they have been persuaded as the man was an ‘expert’.It has also been suggested that people who speak quickly are more persuasive as they appear to know what they are talking about.

The Message is ‘what you are trying to persuade the audience of’ and it has been found that a balanced message is more persuasive than a bias one as the audience feel that they know enough to make an informed decision themselves and are therefore more likely to accept your argument. Also substantial fear in a message is a good persuader but it must affect the audience and not scare them completely and the more the message is shown on TV the more persuasive it is due to the stimuli being reinforced over and over. Zajoncconducted an experiment to support the fact that repeated exposure is a persuasive tool by showing participants completely unfamiliar stimuli, some more frequently than other. Later when asked how good the stimuli were more positive ratings were given to the stimuli that had been shown more frequently.

The Audience is ‘to whom you are aiming the message’ and is based on age, intelligence, personality and gender, with younger people being easier to persuade. Intelligence caneffect degrees of persuasion as more intelligent people are more likely to understand the message and to spot weaknesses in it therefore decreasing persuasion whereas less intelligent people are more likely to not fully understand the message and just agree with it anyway.

A criticism of the Hovland-Yale model is that most of the early research carried out in order to develop this model was carried out on students and army personnel, both of whom are not representative samples of the general public in age, wealth or education and it is therefore inappropriate to generalise these samples to the general public.

The Positive Effects of Video Games on Behaviour (10 marks)

People who play more prosocial games get a chance to explore situations which may later on occur in their life and find a way to deal with them therefore making them more equipped for such situations in the future. Kahne et al (2008) conducted a study into this and found that the majority of those who listed ‘The Sims’ (a life simulation, prosocial, game) as their favourite game had learned more about problems in society and explored more social issues than those who listed another less prosocial game. This suggests that video and computer games can have a prosocial effect on behaviour as things learnt in this game affected the prosocial behaviour that was shown in the future.

Kahne’s study however can be criticised and said to be unreliable as it used a self-report method meaning that participants could have given answers they thought were socially desirable rather than truthful ones and shown demand characteristics. It also makes the data subjective.

Another Positive effect of Video and Computer games on prosocial behaviour is increased self-esteem. This is said to be because we regularly review positive feedback of ourselves through chatrooms, facebook etc. which reinforces our positive views we hold about ourselves and helps to combat any negative thoughts.

A study to support this was carried out by Gonzales et al (2011) who gave students 3 minuetes to either look at theirfacebook page, look in a mirror at themselves or to doansolutly nothing. They then had to ffeback about themselves and It was found that those who had looked at their facebookpages gave the most positive feedback about themselves compared to the two other groups.

Studies into the positive effect of video and computer games on behaviour can be criticised as they are all carried out into the short term effects and therefore we do not have any insight into the long term effects of video and computerwhich could be completely different to those in the short term. Also research can only show a correlation and not a cause and effect and there is a chance that it is other variables effecting behaviour within the studies rather than the video and computer games such as how the participant have been brought up.

The Negative Effects of Video Games on Behaviour (10 marks)

Video games have a different effect on people’s behaviour due to the individual having an active role in carrying out the behaviour which they see rather than just watch it. This can be a bad thing and can have negative effects on people’s behaviour such as reduced helping behaviour and desensitisation to violence.

It has been suggested that greater exposure to negative video and computer games leads to a reduction in the likelihood of helping behaviours. If an individual continually sees people being unhelpful or displaying socially undesirable behaviours they are less likely to think of this as unusual which will impact on their own behaviour.

Anderson et al (2007) conducted a study to support reduces helping behaviour as a negative effect of video games on behaviour by surveying 430 7-9 year olds at two points during the school year. They found that when rated by themselves, their peers and their teachers, children with high exposure to violent games became more verbally and physically aggressive and less prosocial.

It is also said that playing video and computer games can cause desensitisation to violence; the more frequent the exposure to the violence, the less the body and brain will act towards it. It is believed that we get used to seeing this violence and this leads to a reduction in our body’s reaction to it in the form of heart rate and blood pressure.

A study was carried out to support Desensitisation to violence as a negative effect of video games on behaviour by Carnagey et al (2007) who allocated participants to one of two conditions, one playing a violent game for 20 mins and the other a non-violent game. All participants were then shown footage of real life violence and it was found that the participants in the violent condition had reduced heart rates and blood pressure compared to that of the non-violent condition.

This research has good validity and reliability as it was carried out in a lab meaning that extraneous variables that could have also influenced heart rate and blood pressure are controlled. However this study only looks into the short term effects of video games which give us limited insight into the true effects of video games.

The whole idea that the Video Games effect behaviour both negatively and positively is a very western idea wand therefore is culturally bias as many cultures do not have the same exposure to these as the west and all studies were carried out on western cultures.

Media Influences on Prosocial Social Behaviour (10 marks)

One Explanation of Media influences on Prosocial Behaviour is Social Learning Theory (SLT) which says that the prosocial behaviour seen in the media is observed, learnt and imitated. Social Learning Theory as a whole and the idea that we imitate behaviour we observe was supported by a study conducted by Bandura where children watched adults show violent of non-violent behaviour towards a bobo doll before being allowed to interact with it themselves. It was found that Children copied the behaviour shown by the adults in their condition. This supports Social Learning Theory as it shows that we do imitate behaviour that we observe and it supports SLT as an explanation of Media influences on Prosocial Behaviour by suggesting that we imitate what behaviour we see and therefore this would occur for the Prosocial behaviour we see in the media also.

Banduras study however can be criticised as demand characteristics could have been apparent in the children taking part in the study and they could have shown violent/non-violent behaviour towards the doll as they knew to beforehand and not because of the behaviour they observed. One child was even recorded saying ‘there’s the doll we are meant to hit’ on the way into the study which suggests there was demand characteristics apparent in the participants which means the results could be based on untruthful evidence.

Another Explanation is Parental Mediation which says that talking to a child about what they have seen and reinforcing the message can increase the usefulness of the message as the message the children pick up form the media is said to be very short lasting if not reinforced.

Fogel (2007) conducted a study to support Parental Mediation by having 8-12 year olds in California watch an episode of ‘Hang Out’, one group with a parent and one group without. He found that Parental Mediation does in fact reinforce the message however they have to discuss the message properly with the child for it to help at all.

Studies into the effect of the media on prosocial behaviour can be criticised as they are all carried out into the short term effects and therefore we do not have any insight into the long term effects of the media which could be completely different to those in the short term. Also research can only show a correlation and not a cause and effect and there is a chance that it is other variables effecting prosocial behaviour within the studies rather than the media such as how the participant have been brought up.

Media Influences on Antisocial Social Behaviour (10 marks)

One Explanation of Media influences on Antisocial Behaviour is Social Learning Theory (SLT) which says that the Antisocial behaviour seen in the media is observed, learnt and imitated. Social Learning Theory as a whole and the idea that we imitate behaviour we observe was supported by a study conducted by Bandura where children watched adults show violent or non-violent behaviour towards a bobo doll before being allowed to interact with it themselves. It was found that Children copied the behaviour shown by the adults in their condition. This supports Social Learning Theory as it shows that we do imitate behaviour that we observe and it supports SLT as an explanation of Media influences on Antisocial Behaviour by suggesting that we imitate what behaviour we see and therefore this would occur for the Antisocial behaviour we see in the media also.

Banduras study however can be criticised as demand characteristics could have been apparent in the children taking part in the study and they could have shown violent/non-violent behaviour towards the doll as they knew to beforehand and not because of the behaviour they observed. One child was even recorded saying ‘there’s the doll we are meant to hit’ on the way into the study which suggests there was demand characteristics apparent in the participants which means the results could be based on untruthful evidence.

Another Explanation for Media Influences on Antisocial Behaviour is desensitisation which says that continued exposure to violent media desensitises our psychological reactions to them. Our Brains are said to get used to seeing violence and react less and less each time.

A study which undermining study into desensitisation was carried out by Belson (1978) who looked at 1565 teenage boys and finding that high exposure to TV violence lead to desensitisation to violence or decline in respect for authority/rise in violent behaviour.

Studies into the effect of the media on antisocial behaviour can be criticised as they are all carried out into the short term effects and therefore we do not have any insight into the long term effects of the media which could be completely different to those in the short term. Also research can only show a correlation and not a cause and effect and there is a chance that it is other variables effecting antisocial behaviour within the studies rather than the media such as how the participant have been brought up.