CONTENTS

1. MOSCOVICI (1969)
2. SCHMOLCK ET AL. (2002)
3. EVALUATE AGENCY THEORY AS AN EXPLANATION OF OBEDIENCE.
4. BARTLETT’S (1932) THEORY OF RECONSTRUCTIVE MEMORY, INCLUDING SCHEMA THEORY
5. ROLE OF HORMONES IN AGGRESSION.
6. ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SYSTEMATIC DESENSITISATION AS A TREATMENT/THERAPY.
7. LIGHT THERAPY FOR SEASONAL AFFECTIVE DISORDER
8. RAINE ET AL. (1997)
9. WATSON AND RAYNER
10. SACCHI ET AL.
11. BASTIAN (2012)
12. CAPAFÓNS ET AL. (1998)
Moscovici et al (1969)
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of a minority on the majority. The total
sample used were 172 female participants and they were allocated to either of the following
conditions: a consistent, inconsistent or control condition. In the consistent and inconsistent
condition there were six participants, four of them were the true participants (majority) and two
of them were confederates (minority). In the control condition all 6 of the participants were true
participants.
The experiment was conducted in lab. The procedure was that they were shown 36 slides which
were clearly different shades of blue and asked to state the color of each slide out loud. In the
first condition of the experiment the two confederates answered green for each of the 36 slides.
They were totally consistent in their responses. In the second condition of the experiment, they
were inconsistent and answered green 24 times and blue 12 times.
The results of the experiment were that the consistent minority had an affect on the majority
(8.42%) compared to an inconsistent minority (only 1.25% said green). However, 32% of all
participants judged the slide to be green at least once. Thus, the conclusion of the study was
that a consistent minority will influence change. However, a majority is more effective.
Weakness
1.Validity-The experiment was conducted in an artificial laboratory environment and thus it has
low ecological validity as it lacked the atmosphere and environmental factors of real-life
situations in which minorities like pressure groups expert influence over a majority.
2. Validity- The experiment lacks population validity as it used a bias sample of 172 female
American and thus, his results cannot be generalised to those who are not female or American
as others may not respond in the same way to a minority influence.
3. He also deceived his participants, as participants were told that they were taking part in a
colour perception test. This also means that Moscovici did not gain fully informed consent. But,
this was necessary in order to avoid participants showing characteristic demands.
Strengths
1. Participants were randomly allocated into one of the three conditions of the experiment on
minority influence which reduced experimenter bias.

2. Moscovici et al.’s (1969) conclusion that a consistent minority can influence a majority has
supporting evidence from Wood et al. (1994) whose meta-analysis with 97 studies found that
minorities perceived to be consistent were influential in changing the views of the majority.
SCHMOLCK ET AL. (2002)
The aim of this study was to see if there was a relationship in performance on semantic memory
and temporal lobe damage. The sample used were 6 patients with severe damage to the MTL
and 8 Controls with no brain damage. 3 of the patients also had damage to the temporal cortex.
Nine tests were created and based on a set of 48 drawings, half of animals and half of objects.
These pictures were grouped in sixes: 6 land animals, 6 birds, 6 musical instruments, 6
vehicles, etc. Then each participant complete 9 tasks, for example: definitions, category sorting,
etc.
The results of the study were that the controls and patients with damage to the hippocampus
scored 100% on the test for similar pictures. The group of people with damage to their medial
temporal lobe did the worst in every test and patient H.M did better than the medial temporal
lobe group and only slightly worse than the hippocampus group.
The conclusion was that there was a link between damage to the temporal cortex generally and
the loss of semantic LTM. Patients with damage specific to the hippocampus suffered loss of
episodic memory, but not semantic memory. This suggests that semantic and episodic LTM are
encoded in different parts of the brain.
Weakness
1.The tests lacked ecological validity because they were artificial. Instead of naming pictures of
animals and household objects, the patients could have described their childhood memories like
in the study by Teng & Squire (1999).
2. The sample used is very small and H.M. suffered from serious epilepsy. The MTL+ patients
all suffered from herpes. This might make them unrepresentative of the wider population and
the findings cannot be generalizable.
3.The test cannot be replicatied as H.M the unique patient died and so researching someone
with that much brain damage is not available.
Strengths
1.Dr Schmolck improved the validity of her study by using a control group of healthy adults the
same age and educational background as the patients. This is Matched Pairs design.
2. The study is valid because it is backed up by MRI brain scans which show the temporal
cortex activating to do semantic tasks. This explains why the group with damage to the wider
temporal cortex scored lower at these tasks.
3. Schmolck et al. used inter-rater reliability having 14 raters to check definitions on test 8.This
reduces bias and subjectivity in the interpretation of the data making any conclusions more
reliable.
Evaluate agency theory as an explanation of obedience.
Milgram’s agency theory suggests that people obey an authority figure and give up their free will
and that we are all capable of extreme obedience and this serves as a societal function, as
hierarchy is needed for survival. Socialization is the process in which we learn the rules of
society through socializing agents like parents and teachers.
The agentic state shows that people are more likely to obey without questioning the authority
figure and do as they are told. Whereas, in the autonomy state we act on our own free will.
When we are in autonomy state of mind we experience moral strain or anxiety, this moral strain
is relieved when we switch to an agentic state of mind as we displace responsibility and thus we
are more willing to obey.
Strengths of the theory are that in Milgram’s (1963) study 65% of his participant behaved
agentically and shocked the learner to 450 volts. Moreover, during debrief, participants reported
that their behavior was due to the fault of the experimenter, this is proof for displacement of
responsibility.
Weaknesses of the theory are that it does not consider individual differences in personality
therefore it is an incomplete explanation of what influences a person to obey. Furthermore,
there is no qualitative data as switching of mindsets is an internal mental process and this can’t
be measured or defined. Lastly, there is also no evidence for evolutionary basis for obedience.
Bartlett’s (1932) theory of reconstructive memory, including schema theory.
Schema theory is the idea schemas are knowledge or mental representations of information
about a specific event or object and Bartlett believes that memory is not an exact copy of what
we experienced, but an interpretation or reconstruction of events that are influenced by our
schema when we remember them again. Thus, when there are gaps in our knowledge, we use
similar schemes to fill in those gaps, this is known as active reconstruction.
Bartlett conducted a study in 1932 to test his theory. The aim of the study was to test the nature
of reconstructive memory by using an unfamiliar story. The sample used were 20 participants
and they were asked to read “War of Ghosts” and then asked to recall. Bartlett used two
techniques: (1) For serial reproduction, they were asked to recall the story and then retell the
story to another participant 15 to 30 mins later. The second participant then to told it to another
and so on. (2) For repeated reproduction, the same participant was asked to write down the
story after 15 minutes and then asked to recall minutes, days, months etc.
The results of the study were in both conditions, participants tried to make sense of the story by
giving it meaning and this resulted in adding or changing details. Participants filled in gaps in
recall with their own schema for example, boats became a substitute for canoes.
Strengths
1.Bransford and Johnson (1972) showed how schemas help to encode and store difficult to
understand or ambiguous information.
2.Bartell conducted his repeated reproduction using 8 different stories on different participants
and found all of them shortened the stories by omission, transformation, rationalization, and
familiarization. By repeating the experiment and getting the same results increases the reliability
of the experiment.
Weakness
1.Bartlett’s research had minimal standardised controls when recalling was taking place,
therefore the evidence underpinning the reconstructive memory theory lacks scientific rigour.
2. Reconstructive memory simply describes memory traces that we encode at the time of event
rather than explaining how it is reconstructed.
ROLE OF HORMONES IN AGGRESSION.
Hormones are chemical messengers and are produced by glands in the endocrine system.
Hormones affect behavior and this is illustrated as studies show that testosterone and antenatal
increases aggression. Testosterone is an androgen that develops male characteristics and
antenatal is proven to increase competitive aggression. Evidence is that castrated male rodents
show little/no aggressive behavior, but when injected with these hormones they showed typical
aggressive behavior, proving that hormones play a role in aggression.
Strengths
1.Chang et al. (2012) found that when aggression, exploring and boldness increased in fish so
did the amount of testosterone in their blood.
2.Dabbs et al. (1987) found that the level of testosterone was higher in the males who had
committed violent crimes compared to those who had committed non-violent crimes.
3. Hawke conducted an experiment wherein convicted sex offenders were castrated and this led
to a removal of aggression and loss of sex drive. Human case studies like this often find
correlations between hormones and aggression.
Weakness
1.Correlations cannot tell us if an increase in hormones causes aggression or vice versa.
2. Most of the research in this area are conducted on animals, this limits the generalizability of
the findings from experimental research.
Assess the effectiveness of systematic desensitisation as a treatment/therapy.
Systematic desensitization is an evidence-based therapy approach that combines relaxation
techniques with gradual exposure to help you slowly overcome a phobia. This process involves
four steps: (1) Functional analysis is where the therapist and the client identify the nature of the
anxiety and possible triggers. (2) Then the client and therapist make a heirchy chart if fears,
from least feared to most feared. (3) Then the client is taught relaxing methods like breathing
techniques. (4) The client is then put in the lowest situation on the hierarchy of fear and
practices the relaxation techniques until they no longer feel any anxiety.
Strengths- The therapy may be more effective than other therapies as the client has input into
the hierarchy of fear, so they feel some ownership over the therapy. Toozandehani et al (2011)
found that a combined treatment of systematic desensitization and assertive training was more
effective than either treatment on their own, so it is not effective as a single treatment. McGrath
et al (1990) found that 75% of patients with a phobia of specific object showed significant
improvement after systematic desensitisation showing it is effective when used on specific
phobias.
Weakness-Psychoanalysis would argue it is not effective as it does not get rid of the cause for
the phobia, meaning the client may have other issues after the therapy. The treatment is also
only for anxiety disorders. Lastly, the situations or objects have to be clearly identifiable for the
therapy to work so this cannot work for general anxiety disorders where people worry about
imprecise situations.
Light therapy works effectively for people diagnosed with seasonal affective disorder?
Light therapy aims to simulate sunlight for those who suffer from seasonal affective disorder.
Patients sit under a light box for 30 to 60 minutes each day, preferably in the morning.
The stronger the light from the light box the less time the patient has to spend under the light
box. Light boxes may have diffusers so that the light is softer on the eyes. Some light boxes use
a dawn simulator which gradually increases the light in the morning. The light will decrease the
levels of the patient’s melatonin so they should feel less tired throughout the day.
Strengths
1. Lam et al. (2016) found that light therapy was more effective for treating depression than
being given anti-depressants, therefore it can be deemed to be an effective therapy.
2. Light therapy may be a better treatment for those who suffer from side effects from taking
anti-depressants as it has fewer side effects, so is very effective in these cases.
3. Reeves et al. (2012) found that self-report scores for depression fell after one session of light
therapy showing that it does work, and so can be said to be effective.
Weakness
1. It depends on the type of box being used how effective the treatment is as dawn simulators
have been found to be less effective than a light box.
2. Light boxes can be unsafe to use if the patient has pre-existing conditions, such as taking
medicine for rheumatoid arthritis so may not be a suitable treatment for everyone, therefore not
effective for everyone.
3. Light therapy may only work in the short term, it may not prevent seasonal affective disorder
from reoccurring in the future, so it does not cure it, so is not an effective treatment if you want
to cure SAD.
RAINE ET AL. (1997)
The aim of the study to see if there are brain differences between murderers pleading not guilty
by reason of insanity and non-murderers. The sample used were 41 murderers ( 39 men and 2
women) and 41 normal people that acted as the control group and the sampling method used
was opportunity sample.
The procedure was that the participants were injected with the glucose tracer and then
performed the Continuous Performance Task (CPT) for 32 minutes. Then the PET scan was
carried out. It is also important to note that the participants were allowed to practice the CPT ten
minutes before the glucose tracer was injected to make sure they were all equally familiar with
it.
The offenders showed less activity in the frontal lobe, especially the prefrontal cortex which is
associated with rational thinking, self-restraint and memory. There was also less activity in the
parietal lobe, which is associated with abstract thinking (such as “morality” or “justice” but more
activity in the occipital lobe (vision). There was also an imbalance of activity between the left
and right hemispheres in the limbic system.
Strengths
1. Raine et al. carried out a very reliable experiment. The PET scan can be replicated and
produces the same results every time. The CPT was also a standardised procedure and every
participant performed the same task for 32 minutes.
2. The validity of the study is backed up by a meta-analysis by Bufkin & Luttrell, who found 16
other studies with similar findings about the link between prefontal cortex and limbic system
deficits and aggression. We know the prefrontal cortex has a role in restraining aggression, so
Raine is producing the results we would expect to find. This gives the study construct validity.
3. PET is a reliable brain imaging technique that has been used (with growing success) since
the 1970s. It produces objective and replicable results and it can be tested and re-tested to
check its reliability.
4. Raine et al. (1997) can be said to have internal validity as the control group was matched in
terms of mental illness, so the researchers knew that mental illness did not cause the brain
differences.
Weakness
1. The CPT was unrealistic and had no connection to violence or emotional arousal. Also, not all
murders are violent: many require planning and self-control which are exactly the qualities
Raine's NGRIs are supposed to lack.
2. There may have been some subjectivity in Raine et al. (1997) as people still had to interpret
the data from the PET scan, possibly reducing reliability.
3. The use of a laboratory in the study affects the ecological validity as the behaviour seen in
the laboratory may not be the participants’ natural behaviour.
Watson and Rayner
The aim of the study was to investigate if a human could learn to be afraid of a previously
neutral stimulus which initially caused no fear response. The sample used was a 9 month old
baby named Albert and he was recruited via opportunity sampling as he was known to be quite
fearless.
Procedure: At 9 months, Albert was tested with a white rat, a rabbit, cotton wool and other
stimuli to see if he had a fear reaction. He didn’t; this shows these were Neutral Stimuli (NS).
The researchers also checked his fear response by banging an iron bar. Albert cried at the loud
noise; this shows the noise was an Unconditioned Stimulus (UCS) and the crying was an
Unconditioned Response (UCR). At 11 months, Albert was conditioned. He was shown the
white rat three times. Each time the rat was paired with striking the iron bar. Albert started to
whimper. A week later, Albert was conditioned again. The rat was presented 3 times, paired
with the noise.
Watson and Rayner concluded that an infant could be classically conditioner to develop a fear
of a white rat. Also proposed that since the fear reaction was present a month after the initial
association, conditioned emotional responses have the potential to last a life time.
Strengths
1. Watson and Rayner (1920) reported all the stages of their study this means it is possible to
replicate the exact procedure, increasing the reliability of the study.
2. The study has careful controls. For example, Watson hid behind a curtain when striking the
iron bar so that Albert would associate the noise with the rat, not with him or the bar or the
hammer.
Weakness
1. The study lacked population validity as the small sample used was one male 9 month old
baby.
2. It would be unethical to put a baby through the distress Little Albert went through therefore it
is not possible to replicate the study to check the reliability of the findings.
3. The use of a laboratory in the study affects the ecological validity as the behaviour seen in the
laboratory may not be the participants’ natural behaviour.
4. The validity of Watson and Rayner’s (1920) results is questioned as there is some debate
about whether Little Albert was a normal baby as they stated.
SACCHI ET AL.
The aim of the study was to investigate whether doctored photographs of two well known events
could change a person's memories of an event. The sample used 187 Italian undergrads from
ages varying from 19 to 39.
The procedure used was that participants viewed one combination of the photographs for the
Beijing event and the Rome event. Three sets of multiple-choice questions were used eg,
attitude questions. Photographs and questions were presented in a printed questionnaire that
participants completed in classroom settings.

Sacchi thought that doctored images affect the account of events, and the behavioral intentions
of such. However, the results didn't differ between two events suggesting that event familiarity
wasn't a confounding variable
Strengths
1. Sacchi’s task involved using doctored photographs of two famous events, the Tiananmen
Square protest in Beijing or the peaceful protest near the Coliseum, in Rome which are real
events that happened in society therefore increasing task (internal) validity.
2. The experiment was highly scientific as it is used standardized procedures which increases
the internal validity of the study.
Weakness
1. Only 31 out of 187 undergraduate participants used in the original group were male and all of
the participants were Italian, thus the sample used is not representative to the rest of the
population and this reduces generalizability of the study.
2. The use of a laboratory in the study affects the ecological validity as the behaviour seen in the
laboratory may not be the participants’ natural behaviour.
BASTIAN (2012)
The aim of the study was to investiagte whether playing violent video games reduces a person’s
perception of their own humanity and that of their co-players. The experiment was conducted in
a lab and used an independent Groups Design. The total sample was 106 participants (32 Male
and 74 Female) and they aged between 17 to 34.
Participants were randomly assigned to play Mortal Kombat or Top Spin tennis in pairs for 15
minutes, either competitively or collaboratively with the co-player. Next they completed 7-point
rating scales (1: not at all/7: very much so) to measure ‘perceptions of humanness’ of self and
co-player. The results of the study were that self and other humaness ratings were significantly
lower after playing the violent games than the non-violent top spin tennis.
Strengths
1.Bastian et al. (2011) had a controlled procedure as all the participants had a wireless X-box so
they were using the same type of console. This means extraneous variables such as the type of
gaming box did not affect the results thus increasing the reliability of the study.
2. Video games that are commercially readily available were used, e.g. Mortal Kombat and are
not designed by the researcher therefore other researchers can replicate the study using those
games to see if they get the same results to check for reliability.
3. The questionnaires used quantitative data to find out about perceptions of humanity using
Likert scales and this means that the data is not open to interpretation by the researcher
improving the reliability further.
Weakness
1. A weakness of the study is the poor generalizability. Although the sample was relatively large
(106), it comprised all undergraduates students (mean age 19) and there were more than twice
as many women in the sample as men. Therefore, the findings cannot be generalized to older or
younger players.
2. The players only play for a very short amount of time and in the real word players often spend
hours engaged in a game and one could argue playing for longer would simply lead to even
greater effects.
CAPAFÓNS ET AL. (1998)