Mcnamara’s prezi with methodology commentary terms →
helpful website with the questions for each perspective broken down →
THE BIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
Davidson et. al. (DAVID had a SON that liked to meditate)
use this for: Discuss the use of brain imaging technologies (for example, CAT, PET, fMRI) in investigating the relationship between biological factors and behavior.
Details / Results/Analysis●randomized, controlled study on widely used 8-week meditation clinical training program
●measured brain electrical activity via EEG before and immediately after training, then again 4 months later
●25 subjects in meditation group
●16 subject in control
●at the end of the 8 week period, subjects in both groups were injected with influenza vaccine (gave them the flu) / ●significant activity increases in left sided anterior activation in meditators vs. control, a positively associated change
●significant increases in antibodies to influenza vaccine among meditators
PROS: quantitative data, method triangulation of EEG & vaccine, valid b/c all in same program, opportunistic sampling
CONS: small participant population, lack of ecological validity due to atypicality of meditation, little control for confounding variables, opportunistic sampling
Fessler (FEssler’s FEtus)
use this for: examine one evolutionary explanation of behavior
●web-based survey, recruited through postings on pregnancy-related websites (not paid to do survey)
●496 pregnant women
○155 first trimester
○183 second trimester
○158 third trimester
●compared first trimester to later stages of pregnancy
●nausea on 16 point scale
●included distracter questions like “have you picked out a name yet”
●31 item questionnaire (3 point true/false scale) on disgust including:
○animals
○sex
○hygenie
○food / ●heightened disgust sensitivity in first trimester, most notably in food
●heightened disgust as protection from greater risk of infection during first trimester, esp. in food-borne illnesses
PROS: generalizable, large population, ecologically valid, ethically sound bc observation
CONS: subjectivity of survey, self-selection so not representative, social desirability, operationalization of nausea on a 16 point scale
Bremner (BUMMER you have PTSD…)
use this for: discuss how and why particular research methods are used at the biological level of analysis, discuss the use of brain imaging technologies, discuss ethicality
Details / Results/Analysis●33 total women participants
○10 with early childhood sexual abuse and PTSD
○12 women with abuse but no PTSD
○11 without abuse or PTSD
●measured hippocampal volume with MRI
●hippocampal activity during a verbal declarative memory task with PET scan (women with abuse and PTSD & women with abuse and no PTSD) / ●women with abuse and PTSD had 16% smaller hippocampal volume compared to women with abuse and no PTSD
●women with abuse and PTSD had 19% smaller hippocampal volume than those with no abuse or PTSD
●PET scan revealed no significant difference between the experimental group’s brain activity
PROS: natural experiment so ecologically valid, triangulation of 2 brain imaging technologies
CONS: small participant population & one gender so not generalizable, confounding variables, ethicality of exploitation of past trauma
Gazzaniga & Sperry (SPerry SPlit)
use this for: explain one study related to localization of function in the brain
Details / Results/Analysis●three split brain patients (severed corpus callosum used to treat epilepsy)
●patient sees stimulant on each side of the screen for each eye / ●right eye sees word: can say word but not compose it with letters (sent to left side with language skills)
●left eye sees word: can draw or compose it but cannot say it (sent to right side of brain with motor skills)
●isolated functions, localization of the brain
PROS: quantitative data, experimental so controlled variables (standardized tasks), opportunistic sample, applicable
CONS: small participant population, artificiality of lab condition
Kasamatsu & Hirai (HI(gh) rn 420)
use this for: explain effects of neurotransmission on human behavior
***must detail actual biology of neurons (presynaptic, postsynaptic, transmission, etc)
Details / Results/Analysis●went on a 72 hour pilgrimage with Buddhist monks who were undergoing complete sensory deprivation (no talking, food, or water)
●endured cold with no shelter
●⅔ of the way through, began experiencing hallucinations of ancestors/presences
●took blood samples at the beginning of pilgrimage and directly after hallucinations / ●increases serotonin levels, which activated the hypothalamus and frontal cortex, resulting in hallucinations
PROS: ecologically valid, ethical (bc only observation), triangulation of quantitative and rich data (meaning open to interpretation), opportunistic sample
CONS: not generalizable population, not easily replicable
Martinez & Kesner (MARTINEZ the rat)
use this for: explain effects of neurotransmission on human behavior
Details / Results/Analysis●trained rats to run a maze, then divided into 3 groups:
○1: injection of scopolamine (blocks acetylcholine receptors, found in plants)
○2: injected with physostigmine (blocks enzyme that breaks down ACh, so more ACh)
○3: control / ●group 1: slower and made more mistakes
●group 2: faster and made less mistakes
●acetylcholine aids in/affects memory
PROS: experiment, quantitative data, favorable risk benefit ratio
CONS: artificiality, generalizability of rat participants, animal ethics
Baumgartner (you have to trust your BUM GARDENER ;))) )
use this for: outline principles that define the biological level of analysis (hormones affect human behavior), using one or more examples, explain the functions of two hormones on human behavior
Details / Results/Analysis●49 participants placed in fMRI scanner and given either oxytocin (hormone) or placebo via nasal spray
●told to play a trust game with humans and risk game with computer
○player 1 must decide whether or not to keep $10 or share with player 2, tripling the investment so that player 2 has $30
○player 2 must either then reward player one with half ($15) or keep it all
●50% of their investments were poor (did not get return) / ●players given placebo decreased levels of trust, more reluctant to invest again, and if they did, at lower rates
●oxytocin participants more likely to invest again at similar rates, also had lower activity in amygdala and caudate nucleus, areas of fear learning and memory
●oxytocin facilitates trust
PROS: quantitative data, brain imaging, method triangulation, favorable risk benefit ratio, ethical
CONS: high artificiality, not ecologically valid, undue stress
Ashtari (HASH-tari)
use this for: discuss two effects of the environment on physiological processes
Details / Results/Analysis●14 (avg age of 19) males from a residential drug treatment center, had heavily used cannabis from ages 13-18- 6 joints daily in year before quitting
●14 age matched healthy controls
●used DTI, a brain imaging machine that measures water movement through brain tissue / ●drug users experienced damage to the myelin sheath surrounding brain cells
PROS: data triangulation: rich qualitative data, ecologically valid
CONS: participant population- not generalizable b/c all male, only 28, confounding variables
Milner & Corkin (HM had a CORK for a brain)
use this for: examine one interaction between cognition and physiology in terms of behavior, discuss ethicality
Details / Results/Analysis●case study (interviews) of H.M. over 50 years
●has anterograde amnesia (can’t form new memories), can’t acquire new episodic or semantic info
●result of a surgery for treatment of epileptic seizures at age 16, removal of hippocampus and cortices / ●hippocampus is important in forming new memories, localization of function
PROS: rich data, longitudinal, risk benefit ratio
CONS: questionable consent, ethicality, not replicable
Harris & Fiske (Homeless Harris)
use this for: discuss the use of brain imaging technologies
Details / Results/Analysis●“stereotype content model”
●28 total participants
○10 participants in an fMRI viewing 48 photos of social groups
○12 participants viewing objects
●each picture had an image of an SCM (homeless person, drug addict)
●fMRI looked at insula and amygdala to view disgust reaction / ●medial prefrontal cortex (used in relating socially) activation except for extreme out-groups
●out-groups activated insula and amygdala, associated with disgust
●no objects activated medial prefrontal cortex, suggesting dehumanization of out-groups
PROS: brain imaging quantitative data, valid, easily replicable
CONS: artificiality, small participant population, subjective operalization of dehumanization, not cross cultural
Gallese (GallESE rhymes with monkEYS)
use this for: discuss two effects of the environment on physiological processes
Details / Results/Analysis●3 rhesus macaques (monkeys) hooked up to electrodes in the ventral premotor cortex
●497 neurons observed
●researchers allowed monkey to reach for food and recorded on single neuron’s response / ●the same neuron would respond when one monkey viewed another picking up food
●mirror neurons
PROS: brain imaging quantitative data, practical application (ecological validity), favorable risk benefit ratio
CONS: artificiality, generalizability in both size and type of population, animal ethics
Caspi (CASPer the depressed Ghost)
use this for: to what extent does genetic inheritance influence behavior
Details / Results/Analysis●longitudinal study of how stress leads to depression
●people with 5-HTT serotonin transporter gene moderates stress
●1-2 copies of short allele: more depressive symptoms than homozygous for long allele / ●43% of population carries mutation of 5-HTT gene- more susceptible to depression after trauma
●people without gene also became depressed
●link between genetics and behavior
PROS: quantitative, replicable, ethical, ecologically valid bc amount of people that carry the gene
CONS: correlational, deterministic, reductionist, extraneous variables not considered
Bouchard (DOUCHEard)
use this for: to what extent does genetic inheritance influence behavior
Details / Results/Analysis●continuing since 1979
●over 100 sets of Minnesota twins- monozygotic (share 100% same genetics) and dizygotic (share some genetic similarities but not all, shared the womb), separated in infancy and grown up apart
●twins and triplets
●week of psychological/physiological assessment / ●monozygotic- 70% variance in IQ found to be associated with genetic variation
●on multiple tests of personality and temperament, occupational and leisure interests, social attitudes: monozygotic twins reared apart about as similar as reared together
●heritability of psychological traits
PROS: ecologically valid, longitudinal, triangulation of tests, variance in participants (twins and triplets)
CONS: operationalization of traits, deterministic, reductionist
Money- David Reimer case study
use this for: discuss ethical considerations
Details / Results/Analysis●David Reimer-- Canadian man, born male but had penis destroyed during circumcision
●had a twin, Brian, who was born and raised male
●David (initially named Bruce, took name David later) sexually reassigned and raised as female-- became Brenda / ●Psychologist John Money oversaw case and claimed it supported that gender identity is mostly learned (his theory)
○claimed fully successful reassignment
● David later claimed that Dr. Money made the 2 brothers perform sexual acts while in therapy and even photographed it
○claimed was being pressured by Dr. Money to come in and have a vagina constructed when he was 12
○claimed NOT successful-- bullied, didn’t feel female despite hormones, by age 13 had suicidal depression
○parents finally told him about gender reassignment, he became male again and changed his name to David
○got married and had kids, but later killed himself
●support for BIOLOGICAL gender identity, bc though Dr. Money misconstrued information to make it seem that “Brenda” was successful, David didn’t feel female at all
●twin brother later developed schizophrenia
PROS: twin brother served as control, longitudinal case study, rich data
CONS: one of most ethically contentious experiments ever, small participant population, researcher bias/confirmation bias
Newcomer et. al. (NEW memories COMbust)
use this for: explain functions of 2 or more hormones in human behavior
Details / Results/Analysis●51 participants, 25 men, 26 women between the ages of 18-30
○group 1: high daily dose of cortisol
○group 2: low daily dose of cortisol
○group 3: placebo
●took capsule 2x a day for 4 days
●amounts mimicked stressful medical procedures
●listened to and recalled parts of a paragraph
○before treatment
○after 1 day
○after 4 days
○6 days after stopped treatment / ●memory performance suffered in group 1 and only after several days
○14/15 experienced decrease after 4 days
●no other cognitive tests were effected
PROS: risk-benefit ratio, experimental so causational relationship, control group, lab setting decreases confounding variables
CONS: ethicality of undue stress, small participant population, artificiality
THE COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE
Lockhart and Craik (Gilderoy LOCKHART lost his memory)
use this for: two models or theories of one cognitive process
Details / Results/Analysis●alternative to Atkinson & Shiffrin (working, long term, short term)
●Elaborative rehearsal (associate meaning) vs. maintenance rehearsal (repetition)
●gave participants a series of words to memorize (tree, rock, horse etc)
●some would repeat the words over and over and others would make up a storyline/attach meaning to the words
●***see diagram below*** / ●those that did elaborative rehearsal recalled more words
●first theory to show that memory is actually improved when it undergoes deeper processing
●simple explanation for such a complex subject with the terms 'deep' and 'shallow' hardly an all-encompassing look into the theory of memory (aka reductionist/dehumanizing)
●people with illnesses that affect memory (amnesia, alzheimer’s) cannot be included in the levels of processing theory.
PROS: model of memory, word choices are ecologically valid, generalizable (to “normal” population)
CONS: reductionist, artificiality of setting
Simons and Chabris (SIMON on American Idol looks like a gorilla)
use this for: to what extent is one cognitive process reliable
Details / Results/Analysis●selective attention test
●41 participants
●half of the team is dressed in black other half is dressed in white
●Volunteers are asked to count the passes
●Then after the task they are asked if they noticed the gorilla / ●50% did not notice the gorilla bc they were attending to the number of passes the basketball team made
PROS: easily replicable, statistically significant
CONS: lacks ecological validity (artifical task), small population, extraneous variables of the ppl
Neisser & Harsch (it was HARSCH that the Challenger crashed, would have been NEISSER if it didn’t)
use this for: to what extent is one cognitive process reliable, evaluate one theory of how emotion could effect one cognitive process
Details / Results/Analysis●challenger explosion → flashbulb memory
●106 students in an intro psych class given a questionnaire & asked to write a description of how they had heard the news and had to answer seven questions related to where they were, what they were doing, etc., and what emotional feelings they experienced at the time of the event.
●asked “How did you hear of the explosion?” 24 hours later
●2.5 years later, 44 students asked how confident they are in their memory on a scale of 1 to 5 / ●participants were confident but not that accurate
●40% of participants had distorted memory in final report
●Only 11 participants out of the 44 remembered that they had filled out the questionnaire before
●challenge the predictions of the FM theory
●question the reliability of memory in general
○Participants were confident that they remembered the event correctly both times and couldnt explain the discrepancies between the first and second accounts
PROS: natural environment, higher ecological validity, longitudinal study,
CONS: participants were psychology students and not a representative sample/biased, undo stress, small population, operationalize confidence in memory, not replicable
Brewer & Treyens (BREWin beer in the office)
use this for: evaluate schema theory
Details / Results/Analysis●Schema theory states that “as active processors of information, humans integrate new information with existing, stored information.”
●30 university students
●waited in an office for 35 seconds (?), little did they know that this was where the actual experiment was happening
●called into another room and asked to recall as many details from the office
●Atypical/aschematic items: skull, bark, wine bottle, picnic basket, pliers
●Typical/schematic items not present: telephone, books
●typical/schematic items present: coffee pot, desk, typewriter, calendar / ●recalled things that were not present (telephone, books)
●and did not recognize the atypical items
●confirms schema theory
PROS: Strict control over variables to determine cause & effect relationships, ecologically valid bc natural environment of office, debriefed after
CONS: Lacks ecological validity (not a daily activity), Laboratory setting artificial environment, small population, not generalizable/sample bias bc only university students, deception (not told real purpose of experiment)
Loftus and Collins → Mcnamara says use this to supplement a question/as a third study, don’t rely on it bc lack of details available
use this for: evaluate schema theory
Details / Results/Details●we group things based on category (schema)
●asked people to list yellow things and to list birds
●also asked “T/F an ostrich (or canary) is a bird” / ●could list more birds (we organize by classification not characteristics)
●took longer for the ostrich version bc it is an atypical bird
PROS: easy to replicate, generalizable,
CONS: not cross cultural, not ecologically valid (when are you asked to list out yellow things),
Anderson & Pichert (the burglars stole a PITCHER(t))
use this for: evaluate schema theory, to what extent is one cognitive process reliable
Details / Results/Analysis●Controlled lab exp.
● Participants heard a story about two boys who skipped school and spent the day in an isolated house -home of one of the boys. Some details of the house were given.
●Condition one heard the story from the perspective of a potential housebuyer.
●Condition two from the perspective of a potential burglar.
●participants performed a distraction task for 12 minutes.
●all were asked to recall.
●In a second trial, half of the participants were given the opposite schema (either burglar or house buyer) and asked to recall details of the house. Half were asked to recall with the original schema. / ●the new schema changed recall as more details of the new schema were recalled (10%)
●but 7% of the original was recalled as well in the group who changed schema.
●Schema processing seems to affect both encoding and recall.
PROS: controlled lab experiment = limited/no extraneous variables, can infer causation, ethical, control, empirical data, no undue stress, replicable
CONS: ecological validity, artificiality, single blind, not cross cultural? statistical significance?
Loftus & Palmer (the car hit a PALM tree)