Romanian orphanage studies such as the English Romanian Adoptees study carried out by Rutter and Songua-Barke have shown the effects of institutionalisation. Institutionalisation is when a child is kept in care in an institute such as an orphanage or a care home for a long period of time. In Rutter’s study 165 Romanian children who had been institutionalised were studied. 111 of them had been adopted before the age of 2, while the other 54 were adopted by the age of 4. A British group of 52 children who had been adopted by 6 months were used as a control group. Once the Romanian children were adopted they lagged behind their British counterparts physically, mentally and socially as they were smaller and less intelligent, however by the age of 4 the Romanian children had caught up with the British children in terms of their development. This was especially true for the Romanian children who were adopted by 6 months. They noticed that the Romanian children who had been adopted between 6-24 months about 26% of them exhibited disinhibited attachments, while it was about 8% for the Romanian children adopted by 6 months and before, but only about 3% showed disinhibited attachment in the control British group. This shows that the longer a child is institutionalised for the greater risk they will have of developing disinhibited attachments. Their results have also been able to show that it’s important to ensure that children are adopted preferably before 6 months which is the critical period to form an attachment.

Rutter and Songua-Barke’s study was very useful as it was a longitudinal study in which the children were constantly interviewed to monitor their progress, as they were interviewed at intervals of 4, 7, etc years old. This allowed any long term effects to be monitored which benefits the study and helps us to gain a greater understanding of the effects of institutionalisation over a long period of time. Therefore, this study being longitudinal is beneficial as we can see what occurs at different ages after being institutionalised and the progress after being adopted.

Also, as this study has helped us to see the long term effects of institutionalisation, it aids us to be able to know how to improve institutes and places where children are in care. As it allows real world applications to take shape in social care services, adoption services, key workers and parents. As there is now a drive to ensure that children are adopted before 6 months due to the findings of these studies which have shown 6 months to be the critical period, which will lower the risk of disinhibited attachments.

However, even though this study has shown the effects that institutionalisation can have it may not always apply to every situation of institutionalisation. As every child is different, leading to individual differences, so every child will deal will the effects of being institutionalised differently as some may show severe long term issues, while another child may completely recover even though they were institutionalised and adopted at the same time. As some studies have found that securely attached children deal with deprivation and the effects of institutionalisation better than children with anxious/insecure attachment types.

Deprivation is only one factor (EXTRA POINT)

AQA Psychology AS Psya1 January 2011 Past Questions

● Outline and evaluate the working memory model (12 Marks)

The working memory model was made by Baddeley and Hitch to show how we process information to our memory. This model consists of a central executive, phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad and an episodic buffer. The working memory model shows that sensory information gets to our central executive, which works on important tasks and is able to delegate less important tasks to its two slave components, either the phonological loop or the visuo-spatial sketchpad, this then allows the central executive to work as our ‘attention’ and focus on one task while another component of the model can also be working on a task. The central executive has a very limited capacity as do all of the other components of this model. This model also consists of the phonological loop which deals with auditory information, so words heard and seen; processed in the phonological loop using the inner ear and inner voice which work to be our loop maintenance rehearsal to remember the information being processed by being repeated. Also, if there is visual or spatial information then the visuo-spatial sketchpad deals with it, as visual deals with objects seen, while spatial information is the relationship between objects. Which is processed using the inner scribe working to work out the relationship between objects, their size in relation to each other, etc while the visual cache works to process the visual information we receive. Lastly, this model has an episodic buffer which works to be a ‘general store’ for or memory which integrates all the other components of the model as it can deal with both auditory and visual information and possibly other senses as well. This episodic buffer links to our LTM to aid our retrieval of all types of information.

This model supports the idea of dual task performance which the multi-store model of memory couldn’t explain. Due to the central executive this model shows that we can do more than one task at a time which gives more detail into how our memory works. As Baddeley and Hitch carried out a studied to investigate the ability of our dual task performance. He had two groups, the first group was given two one difficult task and one easy task, while group 2 was given two difficult tasks o complete. Both groups were able to finish the tasks, however group 2 would need their central executive for both tasks, so it took them longer. While group 1 used their central executive for the harder tasks, but could delegate the easier tasks to the phonological loop.

However, the central executive seems to be too vague, its accepted as being our attention but little else is explained making this component of this model too simplistic. As results from case studies have shown that there may actually be more than one part to the central executive which aren’t explained or explored, so there may be sub sections to the central executive. Therefore, more research may need to be conducted to gain more insight into the central executive.

On the other hand many case studies have been able to suggest that there are different components to the STM, which this model supports. As cases such as KF who damaged their STM during a motorcycle accident, but only in the case of auditory information, as they could still carry out visual tasks effectively and remember meaningful sounds such a ringing telephone, which would be retrieved by the episodic buffer from their LTM. Therefore, suggests that our short term memory is composed of more than one compartment, as it’s possible to damage one part of the STM, but the rest of the STM to still be functioning.

However, evidence from brain damage patients may not be reliable as the damage may have affected their attention span but not actually their memory directly. So these artificial tests often used to observe their memory may be flawed, as they wouldn’t seem to have a good memory but the issue would be their attention span and not their memory.

AQA Psychology AS Psya2 June 2013 Past Questions

● Discuss one or more explanations of why people resist pressure to conform (8 Marks)

People may be better at resisting pressure to conform if they have a high internal locus of control or have social support. As people with a high internal locus of control have a higher sense of personal control over their own actions and the consequences of them. As they are less likely to rely on other people’s opinions as people with an internal locus of control often seek information for themselves and are more likely to become leaders, so are less likely to conform to follow other people or the majority. While on the other hand, people with an external locus of control are more likely to conform as they believe that external things control a lot of the outcomes in their life.

Avtigis carried out a meta-analysis of people with a high external locus of control and found that they are more susceptible to being influenced and persuaded by other people compared to people with an internal locus of control. Therefore, this suggests that people with an internal locus of control are better at resisting social pressures to conform.

In addition, another explanation for why people may be able to resist pressure to conform is if they receive social support. As people are more confident to resist pressure if they have support from other people who also are resisting. This was the case in a variation of Asch’s study, in which they put a good confederate which gave the right answer, which caused conformity rates to drop from 33% to c.5.5%. As the participant had the support of a confederate they then had the confidence to also give the right answer and not conform to the majority.

However, Allen and Levnie argued that the order of the social support is important, because when the good confederate was put first in line this gave a bigger drop of conformity compared to when the supportive confederate was put right before the participant. Suggesting that just having social support is not as effective if its not in the right order.

AQA Psychology AS Psya1 June 2011 Past Questions

● Outline and evaluate learning theory as an explanation of attachment (8 Marks)

The learning theory suggests that attachments are formed by the pairing of stimuli to cause conditioning or vicarious learning through modelling. As the process of classical conditioning shows that the unconditional stimulus could be the food that a child receives with the unconditional response being happiness. So if the child pairs food with their mother who is the conditioned stimulus who feeds the child. Then eventually the child will have the same response to their mother as they do towards food, so happiness towards mum will be the conditioned response due to classical conditioning, which will lead to the formation of an attachment. Also, operant conditioning works to form an attachment between a child and mother, through positive reinforcement for the child, as they cry the mother comes to provide food or attention to them. On the mother’s end it works to be negative reinforcement, as the mum gives the child something to stop the crying which is the negative stimulus. This cycle works well to ensure the child gets attention and forms an attachment with mum. In addition, social learning theory shows that attachments may be formed by models as the child may observe attachment behaviour and imitate it.

However the learning theory is opposed by the findings of Harlow’s study. As the learning theory suggests that attachments are formed based on food, which is opposed by Harlow. As Harlow found that the monkeys spent only an hour on average with the wire mother that had food, while they spent about 17-18 hours with the cloth wire mother. Which suggests that attachments aren’t based on food, but more likely on comfort and security, but this theory doesn’t consider this.

The learning theory is based on the findings on animal studies such as Palov and the dog conditioned to respond to a bell the same as it responded to food. Also, Skinner’s research using rats who were conditioned to learn how to access food by learning push combinations. However, the theory is then applied to human attachments, which may not be reliable, as humans can’t directly be compared to animals. This suggests that this theory may not be applicable to humans.

This theory explains how but not why – better alternative may be Bowlby’s evolutionary theory (EXTRA POINT)

Learning theory is opposed by Schaffer and Emerson (EXTRA POINT)

AQA Psychology AS Psya1 January 2012 Past Questions

● Outline and evaluate Bowlby’s explanation of attachment (8 Marks)

Bowlby’s evolutionary/monotropic theory explains that an attachment is formed due to survival purposes, so that an attachment is formed which ensures that the child is taken care of and doesn’t die. So this ability to form an attachment is innate so that the child is able to form attachments as soon as its born and this is helped by social enhancers that allow the baby to be able to attach quicker, such as crying which will get the attention of their parent and give more chances for an attachment to be made. The main attachment made first is the child’s monotropic attachment which is the child’s primary attachment that will form the basis for all their future attachments. This monotropic attachment needs to be made within the critical period between 3-6 months so that the child makes a healthy attachment which is essential, also having a sensitive period being the first 3 years. The child will build an internal working model which is based upon their monotropic attachment made as this attachments works to be a blueprint for all future attachments, which links to the continuity hypothesis that believes that the monotropic attachment will affect the child’s attachments and future relationships even in adulthood.

This theory has opposition from Rutter concerning monotropy. As Rutter argued that all attachments are equal and therefore will collectively have an equal impact on future attachments and relationships of that child. However, Bowlby’s theory explains that the monotropic attachment will be the blueprint for future relationships, but he doesn’t discount that non-monotropic attachments are important also. Therefore, Bowlby’s theory may rely too heavily on the child’s monotropic attachment.

Also, case studies suggest that a sensitive period rather than critical is better suited to the theory. As Czech twins who were locked away in a basement for the first 7 years of their life, didn’t make a monotropic attachment within 3-6 months of their life and have fully recovered after being found and now living normal lives today. This suggests that a critical period isn’t the only developmental window for a child to form an attachment.

Overly determinist (EXTRA POINT)

Research support for Bowlby’s Continuity Hypothesis – Sroufe’s Minnesota child-parent study (EXTRA POINT)

Support for the theory being adaptive (EXTRA POINT)

AQA Psychology AS Psya1 January 2012 Past Questions

● Describe and evaluate the multi-store model of memory (12 Marks)

The multi-store model of memory was made by Atkinson and Shiffrin. It shows that sensory information is received at our sensory register, here we either pay attention to the information received so that the information is passed on to our short term memory (STM) or information that we don’t give our attention to will be discarded, as approximately 95% of information our sensory register receives is dumped. When information gets to our STM, unimportant information which isn’t rehearsed using the maintenance rehearsal/rehearsal loop is dumped or displaced by other incoming information as the STM can only hold 7+/- 2 items for approximately 30 secs. So information that is repeated or looped is passed on to our long term memory which has an unlimited capacity and the information is kept indefinitely. Once information is in our LTM, it can be retrieved when needed by the STM to be utilised.

There is a lot of research support for STM and LTM being separate stores like the research carried out by Glanzes and Cunitz who found a distinction between our STM and LTM. As they gave participants a list of neutral words verbally, then asked for immediate free recall. Here the primary and recency effect was found as earlier words and latter words were recalled best. However, when new participants did the same, but given a 30 second distractor task, this destroyed the recency effect because the participants were unable to remember the most recent words, but the primary effect was still intact. These results therefore suggest that STM and LTM have different stores which supports the multi-store model of memory.

However, this model is over simplistic as STM and LTM have been seen through case studies and research that they are not unitary stores, as the case study of KF who suffered brain damaged from a motorcycle accident showed that they could damage a part of their STM memory but still be able to use other parts of their STM. Therefore, suggests that this model may be more complicated and have other compartments within the short term memory.

In addition, the feature of a maintenance/rehearsal loop may not be the only or best rehearsal method. As it can be effective for remembering simple things, however more complicated pieces of information will require a deeper level of processing for it to be committed to memory, as simple repetition is shallow processing and won’t be effective. Therefore, the idea of a rehearsal loop is too simple in many cases, as Craik and Lockhart suggested that the level of processing is important for LTM.

Support from case studies – ‘HM’ had hippocampus removed to reduce epilepsy = STM intact but unable to make new LTMs while existing LTM still intact (EXTRA POINT)

Opposition from case studies – ‘KF’ motorcycle accident damaged STM, leaving them with capacity of only 2, however still able to make new LTM (EXTRA POINT)

Eyewitness testimony (EWT) can be greatly affected by factors such as leading questions. The woman was asked a leading question by the police officer, as he asked her directly if she saw a knife, instead of asking if she saw anything significant and then letting her recall what she actually saw. This caused her to give an unsure answer which may not have been in her original recall of events. Loftus’ research into leading questions showed that they have the ability to change a participant’s recall of events. In one of Loftus’ experiments she got participants to watch footage of a car accident, then asked them questions about it, including a critical question (being the leading question) “Did you see any broken glass?”. In the actual footage showed there was no broken glass, however due to the leading question it caused the group from her previous experiment who had believed the car was going fast answered yes, and saying they saw broken glass. This shows that a leading question can cause an individual to recall something that was never there, which greatly affects the reliability of the EWT given.

In addition, state-dependant forgetting may play a role in this woman having unsure recall of the events. She stated that she was having a night out with friends at a bar so she was most likely drinking, so her state at the time of the event wouldn’t have been sober. If so, for best recall of what she saw, research from Goodwin et al shows that she should be in the same state she was in that night in order to have the best chance of accurate recall.

However, this research is undermined by the fact it lacks external validity. As showing participants footage in a lab experiment doesn’t capture what it would be like in reality, especially the lack of emotional impact that would be present in such an event as a violent assault in a bar. As real accidents/events will cause the person to have heightened emotions, which could help recall in reality like seen by the Catastrophe Theory, in which mental and physical anxiety can play a role in changing the accuracy of recall. However, as Loftus’ experiment is in a lab setting the participants would be in a different emotional state compared to if they were actually seeing the car accident, which may have impacted their EWT differently from the results gained by Loftus. Therefore, the lack of external validity from this study may be flawed and not be applicable to real life examples.

In addition, leading questions may not be the main factor for decreased accuracy in EWT, as the woman that saw the violent attack at the bar may have individual differences that affect her recall. Individual differences can also affect the results from studies like the one Loftus carried out, because people’s eyesight most likely differ, as one person may have poorer vision so believed they saw broken glass, while another participant may have close to perfect vision so didn’t see any broken glass. Therefore, showing that people may recall the same event differently due to differences they have as people. Also, her recall may be worse than one of her friends that was there as she may have been drunk, while her friend was sober. So individual differences in the state individuals are in when they witness an event can affect recall. Therefore, showing that recall would differ from person to person due to how they were on that day.

Additionally, another factor that may affect the reliability of EWT is anxiety. As research from Christianson and Hubinette showed heightened anxiety to increase recall, while research from Johnson and Scott showed heightened anxiety to decrease the accuracy therefore the reliability of EWT. As Johnson and Scott had participants in a waiting room from where they heard an argument happen then saw a man run through that room either holding a pen, low anxiety, or a knife, high anxiety. The found that accuracy of recall was 49% in the pen condition but only 33% in the knife condition, showing that heightened anxiety may lead to less reliable EWT.

However, the problem is there is no simple conclusion on how much anxiety affects EWT because its been found by Halford and Milne that witnesses to violent crimes often have better recall compared to those of non-violent crimes. This then undermines Johnson and Scott’s research which shows us opposite results. Therefore, expresses how there is no simple rule about the effect that anxiety has on EWT.

Also, different people would respond to anxiety differently. As a study by Bothwall et al shows that people that naturally are quite neurotic would be less reliable in giving EWT as it may be less accurate, while people who are less emotionally sensitive so more stable seem to have raised levels of accuracy as stress levels increase. Which shows that different people will have different levels of accuracy when affected by anxiety, as some people can handle stressful situations better than other. Therefore, shows that individual differences still play a role in the reliability of someone’s EWT.

David’s argument can be likened to locus of control, being a dispositional factor for resisting social influence. As people with a high eternal locus of control have a lowered sense of personal control over things that happen, while those with internal locus of control tend to believe they have a lot more control over situations in their life, so are more likely to be able to resist social influence better. People with a high internal locus of control are more independent in their thoughts ad behaviour, so have a personality that is less likely to depend on other’s opinions. Jack saying “having a confident personality”, can be linked to features that a person with an internal locus of control would embody. As people with a high internal locus of control seek useful information for themselves so don’t need to rely on others, these kind of people are often very confident in themselves and have less need to conform. Also, these types of people are more achievement-oriented than people with an external locus of control, as Spector found that those with an internal locus of control have more attributes of a leader, most likely because leaders don’t conform.

However, even though Spector did go on to find a link between locus of control and normative social influence, he found there was no relationship between locus of control and informative social influence. He saw that individuals with a high external locus of control were much more likely to control, but it was in terms of normative social influence that was involved in their conformity. This therefore suggests that locus of control is able to affect resistance to some social influence, but this is only applicable in terms of fitting in, but not in trying to gain correct information because when the focus is on informative social influence, the individual’s locus of control has no effect.

However, Jack’s point may become the minority consensus as Twenge et al found that people are more external than in the past. In his meta-analysis he found that young Americans are increasingly believing that their fate is due more to luck and powerful people, not their own actions. Therefore, supports that individuals with an eternal locus of control tend to feel that they have a low control over their life, which leaves them more vulnerable to social influence and it’s becoming a historical trend.

There is also research support from Avtgis who also carried out a meta-analysis, with studies in relation to locus of control and different types of social influence. His results found a strong positive correlation between scores of both internality and externality on measures of persuasion, social influence and conformity. He found that individuals who were high on the scale of external locus of control tend to be more easily influenced and persuaded, also conforming more than internals did. Therefore, showing that different types of social influence are affected due to a person’s locus of control.

Schizophrenia (Sz) could be caused by things with a biological basis, such as genetics or neural functioning of neurotransmitters such as dopamine. As it’s possible that Sz is passed down from generation to generation due to a deficit in a gene, that’s inherited through genetics. So to investigate the role of genetics in having Sz, 3 different types of studies are used. One being twin studies, in which monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins are studied to see if one has Sz, what the likelihood would be of the other also having Sz. Joseph’s study on both types of twins, monozygotic twins showed a 40.4% concordance rate, while dizygotic twins only had a concordance rate of 7.4%. Another study used are adoption studies, where an adoptee is now in a good family environment and either had a biological parent with Sz or not, so the study helps to disentangle nature and nurture. Tienari did a Finnish Adoption Study in which he found that out of 164 adoptees with Sz biological mothers, 6.7% of them got Sz, while 2% of 197 adoptees with non-Sz mothers got Sz.

However, even though Tenari’s results show a higher concordance for adoptees with Sz biological mothers, his results indicate a much higher rate of Sz in adopted children in general, whether they had Sz parents or not. This could be due to the stresses of adoption itself playing a role in increasing the chance of developing Sz or other family problems such as depression and addiction they saw before they were adopted may also be a factor. Therefore, suggests there may actually be a non-genetic cause for Sz.

In addition, going back to twin studies an issue is how monozygotic twins encounter the same or similar environments. However, an assumption made in twin studies is that the environment of monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins are equivalent, however dizygotic twins are much more likely to be treated as two individuals compared to monozygotic twins. But people expect to see results of monozygotic twins to have greater concordance due to greater genetic similarity, but it may be due to greater environment similarity. As it’s been seen that it’s very difficult to disentangle nature and nurture with twins, especially monozygotic twins. Therefore, this could suggest that Joseph’s results may be more due to environmental differences acting on monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins differently, rather than their genetic similarities being the cause.

In addition to genetics being a cause, there is also the dopamine hypothesis which explains that the higher the dopamine activity in parts of the brain may link to the positive symptoms of Sz. As it’s been studied and seen that it may be the increased number of D2 receptors in the brain that can lead to a much higher uptake of dopamine in certain regions of the brain. Evidence can be seen from both dopamine agonist and dopamine antagonist drugs. As dopamine agonist drugs like amphetamines increase dopaminergic activity by stimulating nerve cells containing dopamine. This can lead individuals without Sz to experience characteristics such as hallucinations and delusions, which would disappear in the absence of the drug. Which shows that an increase of dopamine activity can bring about positive symptoms of Sz even in normal people.

There is support from post-mortem studies from people like Seeman who found 60-110% increase in the density of dopamine receptors of Sz patients compared to a control group. Which shows a strong positive correlation between the frequency of D2 receptors and patients that had Sz. However, an issue with these types of studies is that the patients are dead and can’t be helped, so the approach is limited due to its retrospective nature. In addition, there may have been confounding variables causing those results, for example the Sz patients were diagnosed and on medication which could have caused an increase of D2 receptors in turn giving invalid results in the post-mortem which may have led to incorrect conclusions being made. Therefore, suggests that there may be a link between having a lot of D2 receptors and having Sz, but the type of study used is limited and could have been

affected by confounding variables, so results may not be valid.

Additionally, there is evidence from treatment used, as Leucht et al carried out a meta-analysis of 212 studies which involved the comparison into the effectiveness of different antipsychotics and a placebo. Finding that all of the drugs tested helped to reduce both positive and negative symptoms, being significantly more effective than the placebo as the drugs helped to normalise the dopamine levels in the brain. Therefore, shows that by treating abnormal levels of dopamine it can help to reduce/control both positive and negative symptoms associated to Sz, which supports the concepts and rationale of the dopamine hypothesis.

However, with both the genetics and dopamine hypothesis explanations for Sz, they are both reductionist in their approach as it’s very likely that other factors also play a role to contribute to Sz, not just biological explanations. As the biological approach doesn’t take into account possible psychological and cognitive explanations for why an individual may develop Sz. Even though many of the genetic concordance rates are significant they fail to be comprehensive. While the dopamine hypothesis also fails also fails to give conclusive supporting evidence most of the time. Therefore, suggests that other explanations need to be explored, as genetics and the dopamine hypothesis may be part of the cause in the development of Sz but are not the only cause.

Discuss Bowlby’s theory of attachment. Use learning theory as part of your answer (16 marks)

Bowlby's evolutionary theory for attachments explains how a monotropic attachment is formed, between an infant and its primary attachment figure. As the reasons for the formation of this attachment can be seen due to various factors such as survival purposes. If an infant doesn’t form an attachment, it won’t get cared for so therefore won’t have the essential things they need to survive so would die as a result. Also, Bowlby outlines how the ability to form attachments is innate, so both the adult attachment figure and child have the appropriate mechanisms to help form the attachment needed. This innate feature may be linked to the baby’s innate need for things like food, warmth which are associated with survival. So classical conditioning would play a role in the baby forming an attachment with their attachment figure who would be paired with an unconditional stimulus such as food, in turn helping the baby to form an attachment, to bring about a conditioned response through the use of positive reinforcement which helps the association between the mother and food. Additionally, Bowlby’s theory expresses that social enhancers such as the baby smiling and gazing are also innate functions that the baby has and uses to help adults attach to them until they can reciprocate. The reciprocation can be brought about later through social learning and the baby imitating facial gestures of the adult, which would help to strengthen their attachment. As these features all occur, Bowlby believes that babies will form one main monotropic attachment, from which all other attachments are based upon, this attachment is usually the mother which makes the continuity hypothesis. This monotropic attachment builds an internal working model, which forms the blueprint for all future attachments made which is fortified by social learning, as a child learns how to interact and form relationships by mirroring the model of their attachment figure. There is also a critical period for this attachment to be formed in, between 3-6 months with an overall sensitive period of 3 years.

However, there’s been opposing research and case studies to suggest that a sensitive period is more suited rather than a critical period. As its been seen that children who failed to form attachments between 3-6 months still formed healthy attachments after this period of time which could also suggest individual differences. So having such a set time scale of when attachments must form isn’t very realistic. It’s possible that it’s harder for the infant to form an attachment after 6 months but it’s not impossible to do so. Koluchova studied 2 Czech twins that had been locked in a basement for first 7 years of their life, so they hadn’t had the opportunity to form attachments. This is beyond both the critical and sensitive period, but both of them were still able to develop attachments later and live normal lives now. Therefore, suggests that a sensitive period is better suited to describe the window in which an attachment can be developed as it could still take place outside of this window of opportunity.

There is support for Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis, showing that there’s value in the internal working model. As Sroufe conducted the Minnesota parent-child study finding a strong link between the participants childhood attachments and their adult relationships including their social and emotional behaviour associated with those relationships. This shows that a person’s early attachments does influence a person’s future relationships to a certain extent as the two are strongly linked. Therefore the fact that real world studies support the continuity hypothesis it shows that Bowlby’s theory does have value in showing the formation and results of forming attachments.

There is also support for the adaptive nature of attachments, as attachments may be more for emotional needs rather than solely being for survival purposes. While infant primates may be have clung to their mothers, we now carry children around showing that it’s adaptive over time. However, attachments become very important when the infant becomes more independent and mobile so essential to have someone that looks after the child and have an attachment, as infants often

become mobile around 6 months which is also the window of time for attachments to be formed. Therefore, supports that attachments are adaptive to different needs at different times of the infant’s development.

However, there is opposition for monotropy from Rutter as he argued that all attachments are equal and contribute equally to the infant’s attachment type. As Bowlby’s theory doesn’t account for the fact that infants make multiple attachments that could all work together to affect the infant’s attachment type, but Bowlby focuses on the child’s attachment type and future attachments hinging on the development of their monotropic attachment only. However, the attachment with the father is still very important as the mother or monotrophic attachment made but gives different skills for the development of the infant, which is needed. Therefore, this suggests that Bowlby may have focused too much on the monotrophic attachment and not taken into account the value of many of the attachments made and how they impact the infant as a whole.

Additionally, the learning theory has some explanatory power as infants learn through association, like the innate need for food being a driver to form an attachment to the mother who provides the food and therefore becomes the conditioned stimulus as she is often the main reinforcer. But it may actually be that the attention and responsiveness from the caregiver are essential rewards for the infant in assisting the formation of an attachment. Therefore, showing that the innate needs of a child can lead to associations to be made to help form attachments, but lead on to more complex needs for emotional stimulation and care that makes these attachments stronger.

However, the learning theory only seems to hold face validity while the evolutionary theory by Bowlby explains why attachments form better rather than just saying how. As Bowlby explains the purpose of forming attachments like survival as well as the process as to how it occurs, but the learning theory focuses just on how the attachment is made due to positive reinforcement and continuous associations between stimuli. Therefore, suggests that Bowlby’s theory may hold more weight as it goes to greater depths as to why attachments form, which gives a better overview compared to the learning theory.

Discuss the cognitive approach as a way of explaining and treating depression (16 marks)

The cognitive approach to explaining depression is based on how negative thought processes lead to faulty thinking causing depression to set in. Ellis’ ABC model shows an activating event can lead to a certain belief and consequences that follow. The activating event can be a stimulus which leads to the individual having either rational or irrational beliefs, with the consequences of rational beliefs being rational thoughts and behaviour, however the consequence of irrational beliefs will often led to having irrational thoughts as a result which are translated in the individual’s behaviour. Also, the role of mustabatory thinking leads to disappointment and depression as the individual believes a set of musts that they or life must live up to, but when this doesn’t happen it causes them to feel down as their finite beliefs cause them to be let down. For them to be in a good mental state, these musts need to be changed.

Support for the cognitive approach to explaining depression is how the patients are active in the disorder, as the individual is in control of their own thoughts so they can work to correct their faulty thinking. As its not a passive disorder like other approaches show some abnormalities to be. So this approach works well to encourage the patient to take greater control of their abnormality, which is more effective than being passive such as putting the blame on your genetics for instance. Therefore, with this approach depression can be controlled by the patients themselves as they can monitor and correct their faulty thoughts.

However, the downside of this approach not being passive is that it poses an issue of blame on the patient as this approach focuses heavily on the individual’s role in their abnormality, so may overlook individual situational factors which may affect patients differently and in turn be a contributing factor to their depression. This could cause them to feel that everything is their fault, which could then cause them to fall into greater depression due to this feeling of blame and helplessness. Therefore, this approach may focus too much on the individual’s role and cause them to feel more depressed as they feel that they themselves are to blame, so may feel unsupported and misunderstood even more.

In addition there is also the issue of cause and effect, as it’s unclear whether faulty thoughts lead to depression, or if depression leads to the faulty thinking that occurs. So this leaves the issue of knowing what leads to what with this abnormality, if it’s depression that leads to the faulty thinking then this approach may not be accurately applicable to explaining depression due to possible explanatory flaws it may have. Therefore, the issue of cause and effect is very unclear, so this approach for depression may need more extensive research to get more concrete evidence to be able to draw more certain conclusions.

Regardless of the issue with cause and effect, there must be some relevance to this approach as it’s the basis for cognitive therapies such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). As relative emotive behavioural therapy (REBT) devised by Ellis works by opposing the individual’s self-defeating habits which stem from their irrational and faulty thinking. This therapy helps to highlight the irrationality of their thoughts and how there are negative consequences to their thought patterns. After its been established that they need use more effective methods to cope and think more positively, the patient is encouraged to logically dispute their thinking, so see that their negative thoughts don’t make sense logically from the activating event that occurs, so shouldn’t need to cause faulty thinking. Also, using empirical disputing, understanding that irrational thoughts aren’t correct or consistent with reality so shouldn’t be allowed to manifest. Also, using pragmatic disputing to show that the way they’re used to thinking isn’t helping them and isn’t useful especially in the long run for their mental health and wellbeing. To actively combat these negative thoughts during therapy, the patients carry out this disputing to highlight their faulty thinking, then are given homework between sessions to put this into practise in real world situations in their daily lives so be able to practise

rational thinking. In addition behavioural activation is encouraged, to get the individual more active and involved in pleasurable activities to help deal with any cognitive issues. Lastly the therapist works to instill unconditional positive regard to convince the patient that they are of value to encourage the patient that they are of worth and should believe that, which will in turn help them to feel more open to consider changing their thought processes.

There is support for behavioural activation from Babyak et al as he saw that changing behaviour to be more active can help alleviate depression. As he studied 156 adult volunteers diagnosed with major depression. The participants were randomly allocated to a 4 months treatment course, either being aerobic exercise, drug treatment, or a combination of the two. They found a significant improvement with all participants across the 3 conditions at the end of 4 months, however 6 months after found a much lower relapse rate for the condition that were doing exercise. Therefore, supports that behavioural activation is effective in counteracting the effects of depression and has a longer lasting effect compared to drug therapy.

However, even though CBT is seen to be an effective treatment it is time consuming and expensive to carry out especially on a wide scale. Ellis suggested that for the treatment to be effective around 27 sessions are needed, which takes up a lot of time and often unavailable for those that can’t afford to have therapy, in turn denying a high percentage of people with depression from having access to quality treatment that can help them. Therefore, CBT may only help those that are financially in a good position to pay for the therapy while indirectly denying others of treatment making it elitist.

Describe and evaluate the social learning theory of human aggression. [16 marks]

Social learning theory is based on observation and modelling of a certain type of behaviour, such as aggression. As aggression can be learnt, through a child observing a model they identify with carrying out an aggressive act. Through vicarious reinforcement, the child learns the aggressive behaviour of the model has consequences which can be rewarded or punished, the child learns to retain and replicate the behaviour if the behaviour is seen to have a worthwhile outcome that outweighs any punishment. As seeing the behaviour being rewarded becomes motivation to carry out the same aggressive behaviour if it matches the mental representation, they had formed for a situation that would require an aggressive response. As this mental representation of events needs to represent the aggressive behaviour in terms of expectations of future outcomes if they carry out aggressive behaviour they’ve seen modelled and rewarded (having the outcome that they desire).

The aggressive behaviour is most likely learned and replicated if the model is more directly similar to the observee, so being the same gender or race will make the model more relatable, so the child can imagine themselves doing the same thing also. In addition, the aggressive behaviour is maintained through direct personal experience, because if the child has replicated the aggressive behaviour in the past and rewarded, then they’re more likely to freely repeat the behaviour in the future. Through this experience the child gains confidence in exhibiting aggressive behaviour and builds self-efficacy expectancies as they feel more able to carry out aggressive behaviour in situations that they feel provokes that response, as there’s no fear of punishment, however if the behaviour was previously punished they’d have less confidence in replicating aggressive behaviour.

The social learning theory and its link to aggression is supported by Bandura’s Bobo doll study. As Bandura had child participants ages 3-5 years old, having half of them exposed to an adult model interacting aggressively towards a Bobo doll, while the other half in the second condition were exposed to an adult model interacting non-aggressively with the Bobo doll. In the aggressive condition, the model was seen kicking the doll, saying ‘POW’ and striking it. After the children had observed their model’s actions on film, they were put into a room full of attractive toys, then shortly after frustrated as they were moved to a less appealing room of toys that included the Bobo doll. They found that the children from the aggressive condition also showed both physical and verbal aggression towards the Bobo doll, with about 30% of the aggressive condition repeating the verbal abuse observed by the model. But the children also reproduced their own types of aggression towards the Bobo doll, with boys being more aggressive than girls especially with the same sex model. However, the children from the non-aggressive condition didn’t interact with the Bobo doll aggressively. Therefore, showing that the social learning theory for aggression didn’t have the children just imitating the behaviour seen but caused them to form their own aggression, showing the influence of modelling behaviour. Also showing that the extent to which the child identifies with the model also has an effect to what degree they replicate the behaviour of the model.

However, there are methodological issues with Bandura’s research as it can be seen to have poor operalisation, as the use of a Bobo doll brings issues, as they are meant to be hit, so using it to measure aggression is flawed. Also, the study may not actually represent real aggression as it is a doll, so doesn’t exhibit aggression that can be directly seen or applied to real life situations of human aggression. Therefore, Bandura’s results may give a good overview of how aggressive behaviour can be modelled and replicated, but the methodological issues surrounding the study may cause the results to lack validity.

Support from a real world example can be seen from Phillips et al, who looked at homicide rates in the US in the week following the boxing title fights in the 1980s. He found that murder rates double after a title fight, however this doesn’t occur for any other type of sporting event. Therefore

suggests that people observed the violent, aggressive behaviour, saw it rewarded through a cash prize, title and a belt and chose to replicate it in the real world, leading to increased rates of extreme violence.

Also, a positive aspect of the social learning theory is that it can explain the inconsistencies in aggressive behaviour with humans. As certain events will produce aggression in humans while other may not, which goes against the theory of fixed action patterns outlined in the ecological explanation. As humans are more complex than animals, so understand that aggression is not the most appropriate response in many circumstances that can make us angry. As it’s different for a person to get aggressive towards their friend compared to them getting aggressive towards someone of authority like a police officer, teacher, parent, etc. As the consequences for the same behaviour would be different for the different circumstances. Showing that aggression is exhibited and can be predicted by knowing the consequences of replicating aggressive behaviour. Therefore, suggests that aggression is dependent on the situation and possible consequences of carrying out that response.

The social learning theory can also be used to explain cultural differences with aggression. As there are some cultures where aggression doesn’t exist, as aggression is never modelled, so therefore can’t be learned and replicated. As the Kung San tribe don’t use aggression as children are distracted when they try to become aggressive, so it’s diffused in the moment and not learnt as a viable response to be used, as aggression can be seen to be punished if adults try to use that type of behaviour. Therefore showing that the social learning theory shows that aggression is most likely learned through modelling, observation, and replication, because in cultures where there is no aggression it’s most likely due to there being no models exhibiting any aggression.

‘The rise of virtual relationships has caused as many problems as it has addressed’

Discuss virtual relationships in the social media. Refer to the statement above as a part of your discussion (16 marks)

Virtual relationships have enabled people to be involved in relationships without as much face-to-face interaction being required. This has been beneficial for gated individuals who may feel shy, socially awkward or lack the confidence in person to pursue a relationship with someone. Social media, virtually, removes those gates/barriers and allows these individuals to feel more comfortable and confident in approaching people virtually. The online aspect of anonymity due to the internet allows most barriers to be absent so previously gated individuals are more likely to get into relationships, due to virtual relationships allowing them to have better abilities in holding conversions and presenting the best side of them in order to attract a partner, which may not have been possible in a face-to-face encounter. As Zhao et al found that social media empowers gated individuals to feel more socially desirable. But in real life situations this can cause people to present a whole different persona online and catfish people into thinking they are someone that they are not, which can cause problems. However, virtual relationships has been successful in allowing people to feel more confident in themselves through the absence of gating.

Also, virtual relationships can cause self disclosure to take different forms than the norms of self disclosure in real life situations. As self disclosure tends to be more apparent online, again due to the anonymous nature of being online, so people feel more free and have more confidence to share personal information privately online. However, self disclosure publicly online is less likely as the individual has less control over who sees them if its public. In virtual relationships, self disclosure is more open as there is an element of having less fear of disapproval online, compared to when face-to-face. Rubins ‘strangers on a train’ study consisted of a confederate self disclosing personal information to strangers on a train, and found that a similar level of disclosure was often reciprocated, due to the anonymity of the situation and less fear of disapproval or judgement as the two people didn’t know each other.

Virtual relationships may not often be seen to have the same value as face-to-face relationships, but nonetheless there is support for virtual relationships from Rosenfield and Thomas. As they studied 4000 US people finding a significant correlation between having internet access and people’s relationship status. As 71.8% of people studied had internet access at home also has a partner, while there was only 35.9% of people having a partner if they didn’t have internet access. Therefore showing that the internet may be a major mode of communication and foundation from which many relationships start from; showing the value of the internet and its link to relationships.

Also, Rosenfield and Thomas found no evidence that online relationships don’t lead to strong relationships. As their research found no difference in quality of virtual and offline relationships, which challenges many people’s views about the lack of good relationships that are based online. Therefore suggests that virtual relationships can be just as strong as offline relationships.

Additional support for virtual relationships comes from Baker and Oswald who surveyed 207 participants about shyness. Out of the participants surveyed, the most shy ones used Facebook the most and also scored high for their perceptions of friendship quality online. Showing that Facebook can help to remove gating and build confidence in shy people, enabling them to build better friendships online. Therefore, suggests that the principles of online relationships can also be applied to friendships as well as romantic relationships.

Furthermore, virtual relationships may also be valuable in helping offline relationships, as Zhao et al stated that online and offline shouldn’t be viewed as being separate, as relationships formed online

can still have an effect on their offline lives. As the development of the relationship virtually may allow a gated individual to build their confidence and get to know someone while presenting the more interesting side to them online, then this can help them to feel more confident offline and in a face-to-face encounter be able to still extend the more confident side of them and exhibit a better overall self image which was helped by doing so online, giving them a better chance of connecting to other better offline then they would normally. Therefore, showing that virtual relationships can be very useful in having a successful offline face-to-face encounter that may help to build a good offline relationship.

Lastly, to support virtual relationships Tamir and Mitchell used MRI scans and found increased activity in sections of the brain that were responsible for reward, in the tegmental area. These areas were activated when participants were self disclosing personal information about themselves, this activation of the area of the brain was less apparent if they were talking about someone else. They also found that participants had a heightened sense of pleasure if they were told their thoughts and feelings were being shared with their family and friends, but less feelings of pleasure if they were told that their feelings were going to be kept private. Therefore, these results show a biological basis that supports our desire as humans to feel the need for self disclosure, as we tend to enjoy sharing personal information with others as it is rewarding, so explains why self disclosure online is quite high. Overall, showing that virtual relationships has been able to solve and address many more problems than it is accused of causing.