Biological Approach

➔ Physiological psychologists are interested in how biology affects our psychology.

They look at the role that genetics, brain functions, hormones, and neurotransmitters have on our behavior.
Many physiological psychologists believe that our behavior can be explained via biological mechanisms more so than psychological mechanisms.
However, others believe that there may be an interaction between the two.
➔ Areas of interest: Origins of mental disorders, sleep, localization of brain function.
➔ The main research methods include: laboratory experiments and brain scanning.
Two Main Assumptions:
1. Behavior, cognitions, and emotions can be explained in terms of the working of the brain and the effect of the hormones.
2. Similarities and differences between people can be understood in terms of biological factors and their interactions with other factors.
Study Canli et al (Brain Scans & Emotion)

Generalizability Sample of only ten, healthy, right-handed women does not represent whole population, so it has low generalizability.
Extend to which results can be transferred to
situations, or people who were not originally
studied

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized procedure: valence score, length of time each picture was used for; makes replication
Whether replicating a study would produce easy.
similar results

Application Advertising agencies will know that emotional images are better remembered.
Extend to which something is useful is
debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity High levels of control: More confident it is the IV directly affecting the DV. Controls: The valence ratings and later unexpected recognition task. Could be more
How well a study measures what it’s confident it was the valence of pictures seen that was causing amygdala activation.
intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity
refers to the extent to which the findings of a Situations nothing like real life ones lowers mundane realism. The task at looking at pictures for 2.88 seconds through an fMRI and then rating the emotional
research study are able to be generalized to
real-life settings. intensity on a scale from 0 to 3 is not an activity that participants would come across daily.

Ethics Protection: Participants were exposed to emotionally charge imagery, which could have led to stress. No record of participants being “alleviated” with “happier”
images.

Situational vs. Individual Link to Nature - The findings show that emotions are linked to brain function.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within
the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from However, as experiences were not taken into account, it could be more nurture, causing the results.
the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are
thought to be hard-wired into people pre-
birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are
thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to Participants’ ratings of emotional intensity reflected the valence and arousal ratings of the scenes. Participants’ ratings of emotional intensity were similarly
Know distributed across the 0-3 rating scale (0=29%, 1=22%, 2=24%, 3=25%).
Scenes rated 0-2 had similar distributions of percentage forgotten, similar, or remembered.
Yet, those rated a 3 were remembered and were familiar with a higher frequency than those rated 0-2.

Study Dement and Kleitman (Sleep and Dreams)

Generalizability Nine adult participants; Seven male, two female. Only five people were studied in detail, with four more to confirm findings. Small sample size could make it
Extend to which results can be transferred to difficult to generalize. May not represent a wide cross-section of society, in terms of how and what we dream.
situations, or people who were not originally
studied

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized procedure: Pre-study levels of caffeine and alcohol, doorbell sound, EEG monitoring;
Whether replicating a study would produce makes replication easy to test.
similar results

Application EEG machines that monitor REM/nREM sleep can be used to diagnose a sleep disorder. Wave patterns could be monitored to see whether they were typical or
Extend to which something is useful is atypical.
debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity
How well a study measures what it’s
intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity
refers to the extent to which the findings of a
research study are able to be generalized to
real-life settings.
As there were many controls (pre-study levels of caffeine and alcohol, doorbell sound, EEG monitoring, collection of data), the researchers could confidently
conclude a valid cause and effect (dream recall is affected by the stage of sleep).
Yet, it took place in an artificial setting, which was an unusual environment with electrodes on their head), lowering ecological validity. They also could not
know for sure if what participants said on the self-reports were exactly what they had experienced or not, in terms of dream content. This lowers the validity of
the findings.

Ethics Protection: Sleeping in unnatural situations may have altered their normal sleeping patterns. There is no way of ensuring a normal sleeping night before the day
ended.
Confidentiality: Only initials were used.

Situational vs. Individual Experience of REM & nREM sleep are universal and therefore to nature. All participants experienced both type of sleep and the majority of dreaming occurs in
I- Account for behaviors using factors within REM sleep (could be due to nature).. However, there were individual differences between participants; that could be a response to the environment, as some had
the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from disturbed sleep. Environment can affect sleeping patterns.
the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are
thought to be hard-wired into people pre-
birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are
thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to 88% of participants were accurate for estimation of 5 minutes.
Know 78% of participants were accurate for estimation of 15 minutes. (DN - shorter)
3/9 showed periods of predominantly vertical eye movement (ladder),
1 horizontal dream (tomatoes),
10 no movement (looking in the distance, gaze aversion),
21 mixed (fighting, talking in a group)

Study Schachter and Singer (Two Factors In Emotion)

Generalizability Sample: 185 male students from the University of Minnesota’s Intro.Psych class; 90% volunteered, receiving two extra points on a test. They may not be
Extend to which results can be transferred to representative of a wider population; older adults or people of other cultural backgrounds may of acted differently; females.
situations, or people who were not originally
studied

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized Procedure: Set of confederate’s activity, what injected participants did and said, what
Whether replicating a study would produce was injected, and how observations were set and organized. (Inter-Rater Reliability).
similar results

Use of stooge makes replication more difficult.

Application Can be useful in hospitals, when patients (especially children) are given drugs that have non-desirable side effect. If patients that are engaged in behavior of
Extend to which something is useful is euphoria, this may help them to get through any short-term negative side effects.
debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity High levels of control: More confident it is the IV directly affecting the DV. Controls: Instructions to four groups and how confederate behaved, stooge
How well a study measures what it’s activities, order, script of injector. Information, provided to participants directly affected reported moods and emotions. (Inter-Rater Reliability).
intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity
refers to the extent to which the findings of a Nothing like real-life situations; may lack mundane realism. Task of being injected with an “unknown” drug. Then, sitting with a confederate and attempting to
research study are able to be generalized to
real-life settings. complete a questionnaire.

Ethics Deception: Thought they were receiving Suproxin, misinformed about side effects, stooge, etc.
Protection: Injections could cause pain.

Situational vs. Individual Situational: Trying to understand the physiological reactions they were having or thought they were having.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within
the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from
the external environment Interaction between nature and nurture.
Nature vs. Nurture Nature: Supported by the underlying physiological mechanisms involved in experiencing emotions.
Nature refers to the behaviors that are
thought to be hard-wired into people pre- Nurture: Life experiences affect those emotions and the ability to process them. (Cognitive component)
birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are
thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to In all Epinephrine conditions, pulse rate increased as expected.
Know Those in Epinephrine groups experienced more palpitations and tremors.
For five participants there was no reaction.
Participants in the Epi. Inf. group were significantly less euphoric than those in the Epi. Ign. group.
No difference between the placebo and Epi. Mis. group on levels of euphoria.
The Epi. Mis. and Epi. Inf. groups experienced a slight difference in results when participants had a satisfactory explanation for their physiological state of
arousal they do not label their state with alternative information that is available.
Any participant who questioned the confederate or the experiment was thrown out.

Cognitive Approach
➔ Cognitive psychologists are interested in how we process information.
➔ They look into how we input information, then how we process than information, and finally how we retrieve.use it.
◆ Some cognitive psychologists believe that the brain works like a computer, following the procedure of input-output/storage-output.
➔ Areas of Interest: Memory, forgetting, perception, language, and attention.
➔ Main Research Methods Used: Laboratory Experiments.
➔ Two Main Assumptions:
 1. Behavior and emotions can be explained in terms of the role of cognitive processes such as attention, language, thinking, and memory.
2. Similarities and differences between people can be understood in terms of individual patterns and cognition.
Study Andrade (Doodling)

Generalizability Volunteer participant panel may only reflect a certain type of people and not reflect whole population.
Extend to which results can be transferred to Had just come from another study; more motivated. 40 members from the University of Plymouth; ages range from 18-55 and paid for participating. Only 5
situations, or people who were not originally
studied males.

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized Procedure: Recording, paper, shapes, margins, sceipt, length, etc. Allow for easy
Whether replicating a study would produce replication to test for reliability.
similar results

Application Useful for students when they are studying or listening to a lecture.
Extend to which something is useful is
debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity Many controls = Confident IV is directly affecting the DV. Many controls: Recording, paper, shapes, margins, script, length, etc. Researcher can be confident
How well a study measures what it’s the doodling affected recall directly.
intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity
refers to the extent to which the findings of a Independent Measures: As different participants were used in the doodling and non-doodnlint conditions, participant variables may have affected some results.
research study are able to be generalized to
real-life settings. People in the doodling group may already happen to doodle a lot when they concentrate on tasks, or may simply just have better memory. This lowers validity.

Nothing like real life tasks = lowers mundane realism. Listening to a tape recording and then having an unexpected recall test is not a usual task for people in
everyday life.

Ethics Deception: Were told not expected to remember any information.

Situational vs. Individual Both sides of argument:

I- Account for behaviors using factors within
the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from Individual: Might have a personality type that requires extra stimulation while processing information, or already use similar strategy.
the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture Situational: The process of doodling in the given situation could’ve cause the improvement in recall.
Nature refers to the behaviors that are
thought to be hard-wired into people pre-
birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are
thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to Those in the doodling group shaded a mean of 36.4 shapes (range 3-110).
Know A total of 15 participants in the doodle group and 9 in the control group scored a maximum on the monitoring performance score (correct names - false alarms).
Overall, doolders recalled a mean of 7.5 pieces of correct information (names plus places), compared to 5.8 recalled by controlled.
3 in doodling and 4 in control expected a memory test; data did not make a difference.

Study Baron-Cohen (Eyes Test)

Generalizability
Extend to which results can be transferred to
situations, or people who were not originally
studied
Large and broad sample well represents the Targeted Population.
Group 1: 15 Males with AS/HFA. Recruited through Magazine or support group.
Group 2: 122 normal adults; public library or adult community.
Group 3: All estimated to have high IQs; 103 Normal adults (53 male, 50 female). Undergrads in Cambridge University.
Group 4: 14 randomly selected adults, matchdee for IQ in group 1.
Reliability Measures are standardized = easy to replicate to test for reliability. The Revised Eyes Test could be used by other researchers to see whether they can replicate
Whether replicating a study would produce the findings, and test for reliability. Even though an older version of the eyes test was used in the original studies, they did not find it reliable.
similar results

Application Used in education to help AS/HFA students get extra support to understand emotions and how to read faces and emotions.
Extend to which something is useful is
debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity
How well a study measures what it’s
intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity
refers to the extent to which the findings of a
research study are able to be generalized to
real-life settings.
Comparisons can be useful, as people’s results are being compared on the same, standardized scale. The revised eyes test was used for all participants; this
means that all comparisons between the groups have some validity, as they were being compared on the same scale, using the same questions, etc. Glossary
confirms vocabulary will not affect results.
Revised Eyes Test may not accurately measure Theory Of Mind traits, or just ability to complete test. PArticipants had a ¼ chance of guessing correctly. No
qualitative data as recorded to understand emotions.

Ethics Protection - Scoring poorly on the Eyes Test could have caused AS/HFA participants stress.

Situational vs. Individual Individual - A person’s individual ability to read emotions on faces.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within
the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from The idea of whether AS/HFA can be attributed to nature or nature; it is a long-standing debate, but this study does not add to it.
the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are
thought to be hard-wired into people pre-
birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are
thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to AS/HFA

Know Eyes Test (21.9 = mean)
AQ Test (34.4 = mean)
General Population
Eyes Test (26.2 = mean). N/A AQ
Students
Eyes Test (28.0 = mean)
AQ Test (18.3 = mean)
Matched
Eyes Test (30.9 = mean)
AQ Test (18.9 = mean)

Study Laney et al (False Memories)

Generalizability Experiment 1 - A total of 128 undergraduates were used in the study (UC). 77% were female; Mean age was 20.8 years.
Extend to which results can be transferred to Experiment 2 - A total of 103 undergraduates were used in the study (UWash). 62% were female; Mean age was 19.9 years.
situations, or people who were not originally studied
This can only represent students that volunteered, whose memory may be different than the rest of the population. More motivated.

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized Procedure: Questionnaires, false feedback - makes replication easy. Experiment
Whether replicating a study would produce similar was repeated to test for reliability.
results

Application Use procedures to change minds of picky eaters in children.

Extend to which something is useful is debating how
the findings can be used in everyday life

Validity Many Controls = Confident it is the IV directly affecting the DV. Controls: Rating scales, false feedback - allows researchers to be confident it is the false
How well a study measures what it’s intended to feedback affecting liking of asparagus. Quantitative data can be easily compared.
measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the
extent to which the findings of a research study are Nothing like real life tasks = lowers mundane realism. Completing questionnaires and giving false feedback about their eating habits is unusual.
able to be generalized to real-life settings.
Qualitative data from self-reports may not reveal whole truth and are subjective.

Ethics Informed Consent - Participants could not give consent because they did not know the true aim.
Deception - Were not told the true aim.

Situational vs. Individual Nurture - Memories manipulated.

I- Account for behaviors using factors within the
person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the
external environment
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be
hard-wired into people pre-birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to
develop through the lifetime of the person.

Results and Numbers to Know

Experiment 1
FHI:
Excluded from the analysis were 31 participants (17 in the love group),
reasonably sure they liked asparagus before manipulation.
Love group: Confidence increased by 2.6 points average.
Control Group: Confidence increased by 0.2 points average.
Experiment 2
FHI:
Excluded from the analysis were 30 participants (18 in love group),
reasonably sure they liked asparagus before manipulation.
Love group: Confidence increased by 2.5 points average.
Control Group: Confidence increased by 1.07 points average.

M/B: M/B:
Love Group: 22% memory; 35% belief; 43% positive it was not the case. Love group: 28% memory, 28% belief, 45% positive it was not the case.
Control Group: 12% memory, 28% belief, 61% positive it was not the Control group: 6% memory, 38% belief, 56% positive it was not the case.
case.
Believers vs. Non-Believers
Believers vs. Non-Believers Love group: 21 believers.
48% were believers. Those who had a memory increased by an average of 4.53 points; Non-
Those who had a memory increased by an average of 5.5 points; Belief Believers increased by an average of 0.26 points.
increased by an average of 0.9 points.

Learning Approach
➔ Behaviorist psychologists are interested in ways in which humans and animals learn.
➔ They look into general laws that can apply to all species and how the experiences we have mold our behavior over time.
Three main areas:
1. Learning by consequences of behavior (operant conditioning)
2. Learning through occasion (classical conditioning)
3. Learning through observation, imitation, and modeling (social learning)
Strict behaviorism follows the idea that we should “observe the observable”, and not examine mental processes, as they cannot be directly seen. Behaviors can be directly seen, so we have objective
measures of behavior.
➔ Areas of Interest: Behavior modification, therapies for mental health disorders, for prisoners, etc. and development of behaviorism such as aggression.
 ➔ Main research method: Lab experiments.
Two Main Assumptions:
1. Conditioning helps to explain changes in behavior.
2. Social learning helps to explain changes in behavior.
Study Bandura, Ross, and Ross (Aggression)

Generalizability Wide sample: Opportunity Sampling, 72 from nursery school at Stanford University. 36 Male, 36 Female.
Extend to which results can be transferred to situations, or people who were not originally studied 37-69 months old; Average of 4 years and 4 months (52 months).

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Standardized procedure: Timing, layout of room, toys
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results available. All makes replication to test for reliability easy.
The use of stooge decreases reliability.

Application Useful for TV networks to ensure programs are appropriate for children, or censor appropriate things.
Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings can be used in everyday life

Validity High levels of control; can be confident IV is directly affecting DV. Controls: Timing, layout of room, toys available -
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure allow researchers t0 be confident model’s actions affect the kid’s behavior.
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a research study are
able to be generalized to real-life settings.
The lab setting was unfamiliar and some of the tasks expected of the child were unusual (watching and adult playing and
joining), so some parts of the study may have low mundane realism and ecological validity.

Ethics Protection - kids did not leave in the same state they came in: aggressive behavior could have continued, could have
been distressed from witnessing model, frustrate because they can’t play with the best toys.

Situational vs. Individual Situational: Model situation affected behavior.

I- Account for behaviors using factors within the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture Nurture: Environment caused aggressive behavior.
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be hard-wired into people pre-birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to develop through the lifetime of the person.

Results and Numbers to Know 72 from nursery school at Stanford University. 36 Male, 36 Female.
37-69 months old; Average of 4 years and 4 months (52 months).
6/8 response categories compared to non-aggressive model.
⅜ response categories compared to control.

Study Saavedra and Silverman (Button Phobia)

Generalizability Narrow Sample: Difficult to generalize, because the study focused on one boy and his specific phobia.
Extend to which results can be transferred to situations, or people who were not
originally studied

Reliability High levels of standardization = can replicate for reliability. Difficult to replicate, because the study focused on one boy and his
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results specific phobia, but the techniques can be (“feelings thermometer”).

Application Showed intervention therapy was successful, so this can be used on other people with phobias.
Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings can be used in
everyday life

Validity When researchers focus on one individual (or unit of individuals), they can collect rich, in-depth data that has details. This makes
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure findings valid. The researchers focused on just one erson (the boy). He was assessed using DSM-IV. His feelings were assessed
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a
research study are able to be generalized to real-life settings. through an intervention. Therefore, a lot of the data was collected to help understand the boy’s phobias and how to best treat it,
increasing validity.

The participant is studied as part of his everyday life, which means the whole process tends to have ecological validity. It could be
argued that the study has ecological validity because of the therapeutic setting.

However, ratings are subjective, so he could have lied to get out of therapy, although this is unlikely because he chose to undergo
therapy.

Ethics Informed consent- Boy and mother consented.

Protection: Sme distress in the exposure therapy sessions.

Situational vs. Individual Nurture: Button incident caused phobia, he unlearned phobia through therapy.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be hard-wired into people pre-birth
(innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to develop through the lifetime of the
person.

Results and Numbers to Know His distress increased from session 2-3 and 3-4. In session 4, the boy’s subjective ratings that had been 6 or 7 prior to the treatment
were now higher.
In one session, he had to imagine a bowl of buttons fall on him; 8 at start, 5 midway through session, ended up at 3.
Another, had to imagine hugging his mother who was wearing a shirt with may buttons; 7 at start, 3, then 3.

Study Pepperberg (Parrot Learning)

Generalizability It is a case study about a specific bird, so he does not represent the whole population. Does not represent all African Grey
Extend to which results can be transferred to situations, or people who were not originally studied parrots.

Reliability Standardized Procedure = Easy to replicate to test for reliability. Standardized Procedure: Materials, colors, shapes, tests
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results - makes replication easy.

Application Useful in training zoo animals by observation and imitation.

Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings can be used in everyday life

Validity Learning “same” and “different” are not normal. Tasks for a parrot, so the study lacks mundane realism and ecological
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure validity because of the lab setting.
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a research study
are able to be generalized to real-life settings.
Ethics Numbers- Only one parrot, so least possible was used.
Deprivation- Not deprived of food and aversive conditioning was not used. Was given extra food if he asked.
Caging- He was not placed in an unusual situation. In his usual cage during “sleeping hours”.

Situational vs. Individual Nurture- As Alex had been taught during the procedure, the study supports the nurture side of the debate. He was
I- Account for behaviors using factors within the person learning through operant conditioning and social learning. He had been taught the use of labels, as it was not something
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture that naturally came to him (model/rival training). Therefore, it is difficult to argue that his abilities were due to nature.
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be hard-wired into people pre-birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to develop through the lifetime of the person.

Results and Numbers to Know Familiar Objects

Alex scored 99/129 (76.7%) correct responses overall.
Alex scored 69/99 (69.7%) on first-trial performance only.
Based on chance, he could have scored 33.3%
Pairs: Consisting of objects that were no longer novel but contained a color, shape ,or material he could not yet label:
13/17 (76.5% overall)
10/13 (76.9%) for first trials

Novel Objects
Alex scored 96/113 (85%) correct responses overall.
Alex scored 79/96 (82.3%) on first trials.
When there was one novel object in a pair, his score was 86%. Both objects, it was 83%.

Probes
Alex scored 55/61 (90.2%) correct responses overall.
Alex scored 49/55 (89.1%) on first trial.

Social Approach
➔
Social psychologists are interested in how we “work” in the social world.
➔
They look at how individuals interact with each other, and how we interact with groups.
◆ Therefore, they look at how the individual as an individual, but also as a group member and see how this affects behavior.
◆ They also examine how the role of culture and society affects our behavior.
➔ Areas of Interest: prejudice, Obedience, and Conformity.
➔ The main research methods used: Questionnaires and Interviews.
Two main assumptions:
1. Behavior, cognitions, and emotions can be influenced by other individuals.
2. Behavior, cognitions, and emotions can be influenced by groups and social context.
Study Milgram (Obedience)

Generalizability Volunteer Sampling: More willing.

Extend to which results can be transferred to A newspaper advertisement was used to recruit 40 men, aged 20-50. Range of backgrounds and jobs, manual laborers, white-collar workers, professionals.
situations, or people who were not originally - high generalizability in terms of occupation
studied - large enough to suggest a consistent effect
- low generalizable/low population validity - only males
- all from the same area of New Haven - ethnocentric

Reliability High Standardization = Easily replicated to test for reliability. Standardized procedure: Drawing of lots to be a teacher/learner, timing of scripted responses were
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results heard, starting that the shocks were going up in 15-volt increments.

Application Nazis in WWII followed destructive orders from higher authority; genocides.
Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings
can be used in everyday life

Validity
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which
the findings of a research study are able to be generalized to real-life
settings.
High Control = IV directly affecting DV. Having a “test” shock, receiving prods at a certain time, in the same order, shock generator being the same for everybody.
Situations that the participants were placed in that caused obedience levels.
Artificial Setting leads to low ecological validity.
Nothing like a real-life situation, lacks mundane realism. Having to give an electric shock to somebody who gets a word-pair wrong is not a task that people come
across in everyday life.

Ethics Deception- Thought shock was real

Debriefing- Revealed truth at end of study, followed up 6 months later
Right to Withdraw- The prods given by the experimenter made it difficult.

Situational vs. Individual Individual: Account for behaviors using factors within the person.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within the person Situational: Prestigious university, authority figure; account for behavior using factors from external environment.
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the external
environment
Wide sample to make sure individual factors would not affect obedience levels.
Nature vs. Nurture
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be hard-wired into
people pre-birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to develop through
the lifetime of the person.

Results and Numbers to Know 14 Yale students were asked to plot a distribution of obedience; all stated 0-3% of the sample would give the full 450-volt shock; mean as 1.2%.
“How painful do you think the shock that you gave him was?” 14 point scale; Average was 13.42.
14 giggled nervously; 3 had seizures and for one, the procedure was stopped.
No participant stopped before shock level of 300 volts (when would pound wall and stop answering).
A total of 14 participants (35%) were classified as defiant, while 26 (65%) were obedient.

Study Piliavin (Subway Samaritans)

Generalizability Sample: 4,450 passengers in 2 different subway lines as “unsolicited participants”. An average of 43 people were present
Extend to which results can be transferred to situations, or people who were not originally studied in each carriage; about 8 in the immediate critical area. About 45% black and 55% white.

Could also be difficult to generalize, as all participants were city dwellers who are presumably used to riding the train
and might be used to “feeling anonymous”. More used to deindividuation (losing their sense of identity).

Reliability Standardization: Same intervals between stops (7.5 minutes); victim fell in the same posture after 70 seconds. Time when
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results model steps in.

Difficult to replicate studies in which stooges are involved, so this lowers reliability.

Application Educate people on bystanders’ intervention to help others no matter who is in need.
Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings can be used in everyday life

Validity Realistic setting = High ecological validity. Unaware they’re taking part in a study = natural and valid. No demand
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure characteristics.
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a research study
are able to be generalized to real-life settings.

Ethics Deception- Believed what they saw was real.

Informed Consent- Could not get consent.
Protection- Distress, never debriefed.

Situational vs. Individual Situational - Subway train and types of victim affected behavior.
I- Account for behaviors using factors within the person
S- Account for behaviors using factors from the external environment
Nature vs. Nurture Individual - May be a certain personality type that made help or not help people.
Nature refers to the behaviors that are thought to be hard-wired into people pre-birth (innate or genetic).
Nurture refers to the behavior that are thought to develop through the lifetime of the person.

Results and Numbers to Know Cane Victim: Received spontaneous help before the model acted on 62/65 trials.
Drunk Victim: Receive spontaneous help before the model on 19/38 trials.
On average, 60% of participants in critical area were male.
Out of 81 spontaneous helpers, 90% were male.
81 of first helpers, 64% were white.
There were 65 trials where spontaneous help was given to white victims; in these cases, 68% of the helpers were white.
IN 16 trials where spontaneous help was given to black victims, 50% of these helpers were white.
In 21 or the 103 total trials, 34 participants left the critical area to move away from the victim.

Study Yamamoto (Chimpanzee Helping)

Generalizability Only five chimpanzee pairings were used; may not be representative of all chimps. They were bred in captivity.
Extend to which results can be transferred to situations, or people who were not originally studied

Reliability High Standardization; to test for reliability. Standardized procedure- tools, experimental booths, juice- makes replication
Whether replicating a study would produce similar results easy.

Application Educate children about helping, requesting for help.

Extend to which something is useful is debating how the findings can be used in everyday life

Validity High Controls: IV is directly affecting DV. Controls: tools available, rooms, randomization of stick and straw, juice. Can
How well a study measures what it’s intended to measure be confident it was the condition that affected their ability to choose the tool.
Ecological Validity - Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a research study
are able to be generalized to real-life settings. Repeated measures reduces the effects of participant variables.
3 Cameras: Inter-rater reliability.

Nothing like real-life situation; lack mundane realism. The task of helping in an experimental booth with limited amount
 of items. Situation is also artificial, which lowers the ecological validity.

Ethics Animals- Numbers were good, as they use the smallest number of chimps possible.
Housing- Socially housed.
Deprivation- Not deprived of food or exposed to aversive stimuli.

Results and Numbers to Know First “Can See” Condition:

90.8% of trials, an object form the box was offered.
90% required request.
Four chimpanzees offered the straw or stick first significantly more than others:
Ai on 87%
Cleo on 97.4% of trials
Pal on 93.5% of trials
Ayumu on 78% of trials.
Pan offered the brush on 79.5% of her trials.

“Cannot See” Condition:

95.8% of trials, an object from the box was offered.
71.7% required request.
Four chimpanzees offered the straw or stick significantly more than others:
Ai in 89.4% of trials
Cleo in 88.9% of trials
Pal in 100% of trials
Ayumu in 93% of trials
Pan offered the brush in 55.3% of trials.
Ayumu was the only that looked through the hole.

Second “Can See” Condition:

97.4% of trials, an object was offered from the box.
79.4% required request.
Ai in 81%
Cleo in 95.7% ; Pal in 100% of trials.