Researchers have long known that children who grow up in aggressive or violent households are more likely to become violent or aggressive in future relationships. Most of us have experienced bullying or violence at least once in our life, and some experience it for long periods of time than others. The short-term and long-term effects of this to an individual will be the focus of this essay.
According to Olweus (1992), short term exposure to violence typically leads to anger, depression, higher rate of illness, lower grades than non-bullied peers, and suicidal thoughts and feelings. Long term exposure to violence, on the other hand, leads to lingering feelings of anger and bitterness, difficulty in trusting people, avoidance of new social situations, increased tendency to be a loner and low self-esteem.
Barbara Wilson carried out a study investigating the short-term effects of media violence, where elementary school children were exposed to one episode of MightyMorphin Power Rangers. She found that the children demonstrated significantly more intentional acts of aggression afterwards compared to those that did not watch the program.
Carney and Hazler found that bullying affects our cortisol levels, which is a type of hormone secreted when we are stressed. The researchers measured cortisol levels in the saliva of 6th-grade students, and asked them to fill out a questionnaire on their experience of being bullied or watching someone being bullied. Cortisol levels were measured first thing in the morning and just before lunchtime. Lunchtime was chosen because it is one of the less supervised times of the day, when adolescents are more likely to be bullied or observe someone being bullied. They found that bullying appears to cause a spike in cortisol levels. However, Carney and Hazler found that humans who experience long-term bullying had lower levels of cortisol compared to those who experienced short-term bullying.
Elliot et al carried out a survey to discover if bullying at school affects people in later life. The survey of over 1000 adults shows that bullying affects not only your self-esteem as an adult, but your ability to make friends, succeed in education, and in work and social relationships. Nearly half (46%) of those who were bullied contemplated suicide compared to only 7%. The majority of the adults reported feeling angry and bitter now about the bullying they suffered as children. This shows that long-term effects of violence can cause us to feel angry and bitter.
Patterson et al (1989) wanted to see if children are affected by aggression at home. Families with at least one very aggressive child were compared with families with a normal child. They were matched for family size, socio-economic status, and many other factors. They found that aggressive children were more likely to become from home where less affection was shown and more arguments and punishment occurred. This study shows that long-term exposure to violence can cause individuals to become violent themselves, because of social learning theory, which is based on the assumption that people imitate behaviour by observing other people.
Having the support of family members and peers, who can be confided in when one has been bullied, tends to lessen the impact of bullying.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Describe the role of communication in maintaining relationships
Communication is one of the most important factors for a well functioning relationship. If there is no communication, then relationship would be difficult.
One of the most important factors in maintaing a relationship seems to be attributional style. In happy relationships, attributions tend to be positively biased towards the partner - that is, positive behaviours are seen as dispositional and negative behaviours are seen as situational. Unhealthy relationships are the opposite. It seems that communicating attributions for negative events or behaviour could determine whether a relationship will end. It is important, however, to consider if it is the quality of the relationship which leads to the negative communication or the attributional style which leads to the breakdown of a relationship. Bradbury and Fincham conducted a meta-analysis of research studies on the attributions married couples made on each others behaviour. They found that poor marital quality in a couple predicted dispositional attributions to negative behaviours and situational attributions to positive behaviours. They found that wives who had the tendency to make dispositional attributions about their husbands in negative situations were also more likely to behave negatively towards their husbands. The opposite was found in wives who made dispositional attributions about their husband in positive situations. Generally, the attributions that partners make about each other are associated with levels of satisfaction with the relationship as well as their behaviour towards each other. Negative communication causes marital dissatisfaction and may eventually lead to the end of the relationship.
It seems that communication plays an integral role in the maintenance of relationships. This is supported by the social penetration theory, which argues that close relationships are formed by a gradual process of self-disclosure. Closeness develops if the participants proceed in a gradual manner from superficial to intimate levels of communication and this is associated with attraction. Self-disclosure is the sharing of facts about one's life with a loved one, as well as inner thoughts, feelings and emotions. Collins and Miller conducted a meta-analysis research study that showed that people who disclosed intimate information about themselves are more liked than people who don’t. Disclosing something about yourself makes both strangers and friends like you more. Self-disclosure leads to self-validation, which is the feeling of being truly known and accepted by the listener. A deeper mutual understanding allows each partner to meet the needs of the other more easily. It is also a symbol of trust, which is important in relationships.
Males and females have differences when communicating, and sometimes this can lead to communication error where one gender mistakens the other gender for what they are really trying to say. In observational studies, Tannen found gender differences in how men and women have conversations. Men interrupt more, women use more language tags, women prefer emotional support whereas men tend to have a problem solving approach to problems. According to Tannen, women are more likely than men to respond to someone's negative feelings with understanding and acceptance - to reassure that it is all right to feel bad, perhaps sharing an account of a time when they had similar feelings. Men are more likely than women to take the initial disclosure as a complaint about a problem, and to offer helpful advice on solving it. This leads to misunderstandings: a woman may feel that a problem-solving response belittles her feelings, by failing to deal with them directly. For example, a woman may feel upset about her weight gain after her pregnancy. A woman might response: "I know, it's as if you're not in control of your body", whereas a men might reply, "You could always join a health club to get back into shape". Similarly, men may be troubled by a women's typical emotional response, and how they fail to support them in finding a solution to the problem. Understanding gender differences in communication styles is an important part of successful problem resolution in heterosexual relationships.
Communication plays a pivotal role for the maintenance of relationships. Research comes from mainly western countries, however, therefore cannot be generalised. We also have neglected cultural considerations - other cultures may communicate differently, and many of the research is self-report meaning that respondents may not be fully honest.
One of the most important factors in maintaing a relationship seems to be attributional style. In happy relationships, attributions tend to be positively biased towards the partner - that is, positive behaviours are seen as dispositional and negative behaviours are seen as situational. Unhealthy relationships are the opposite. It seems that communicating attributions for negative events or behaviour could determine whether a relationship will end. It is important, however, to consider if it is the quality of the relationship which leads to the negative communication or the attributional style which leads to the breakdown of a relationship. Bradbury and Fincham conducted a meta-analysis of research studies on the attributions married couples made on each others behaviour. They found that poor marital quality in a couple predicted dispositional attributions to negative behaviours and situational attributions to positive behaviours. They found that wives who had the tendency to make dispositional attributions about their husbands in negative situations were also more likely to behave negatively towards their husbands. The opposite was found in wives who made dispositional attributions about their husband in positive situations. Generally, the attributions that partners make about each other are associated with levels of satisfaction with the relationship as well as their behaviour towards each other. Negative communication causes marital dissatisfaction and may eventually lead to the end of the relationship.
It seems that communication plays an integral role in the maintenance of relationships. This is supported by the social penetration theory, which argues that close relationships are formed by a gradual process of self-disclosure. Closeness develops if the participants proceed in a gradual manner from superficial to intimate levels of communication and this is associated with attraction. Self-disclosure is the sharing of facts about one's life with a loved one, as well as inner thoughts, feelings and emotions. Collins and Miller conducted a meta-analysis research study that showed that people who disclosed intimate information about themselves are more liked than people who don’t. Disclosing something about yourself makes both strangers and friends like you more. Self-disclosure leads to self-validation, which is the feeling of being truly known and accepted by the listener. A deeper mutual understanding allows each partner to meet the needs of the other more easily. It is also a symbol of trust, which is important in relationships.
Males and females have differences when communicating, and sometimes this can lead to communication error where one gender mistakens the other gender for what they are really trying to say. In observational studies, Tannen found gender differences in how men and women have conversations. Men interrupt more, women use more language tags, women prefer emotional support whereas men tend to have a problem solving approach to problems. According to Tannen, women are more likely than men to respond to someone's negative feelings with understanding and acceptance - to reassure that it is all right to feel bad, perhaps sharing an account of a time when they had similar feelings. Men are more likely than women to take the initial disclosure as a complaint about a problem, and to offer helpful advice on solving it. This leads to misunderstandings: a woman may feel that a problem-solving response belittles her feelings, by failing to deal with them directly. For example, a woman may feel upset about her weight gain after her pregnancy. A woman might response: "I know, it's as if you're not in control of your body", whereas a men might reply, "You could always join a health club to get back into shape". Similarly, men may be troubled by a women's typical emotional response, and how they fail to support them in finding a solution to the problem. Understanding gender differences in communication styles is an important part of successful problem resolution in heterosexual relationships.
Communication plays a pivotal role for the maintenance of relationships. Research comes from mainly western countries, however, therefore cannot be generalised. We also have neglected cultural considerations - other cultures may communicate differently, and many of the research is self-report meaning that respondents may not be fully honest.
Attraction
- Examine biological, psychological and social origins of attraction
- To what extent do biological, cognitive and sociocultural factors influences human relationships
- Evaluate psychological research (that is, theories and/or studies) relevant to the study of human relationships
Everyone experiences attraction at some point in their life. But what is it that makes us attracted to another person? This essay will examine the biological, cognitive and sociocultural origins and explanations of attraction.
The biological factors that I will be examining is hormones, effects of neurotransmitters and evolutionary origins, and how they influence attraction.
Modern research has discovered that two hormones help to increase the bond between lovers. These are oxytocin and vasopressin. Oxytocin is a powerful hormone released during sex, which tends to deepen and intensify feelings of attachment. It is also released during childbirth, to help secure the bond between mother and baby. Pederan and Boccia studied rats and found that oxytocin leads to a shift in the mother's focus from grooming herself to grooming the rat pup. Winslow et al found that when animals were injected with vasopressin, they tend to form stable pair bonds and have more sex than neccessary. When male animals were given a drug that suppressed vasopressin, they lost their devotion to their mates and no longer tried to protect them from potential suitors. This shows that vasopressin plays an important role in the commitment of relationships. Both studies show that oxytocin and vasopressin are strong hormones involved in bonding. However, because this study was done on humans, it is difficult to generalise to humans. Also, the way in which animals show love may be interpreted differently by humans.
Neurotransmitters also explain why we are attracted to others. Chemical substances in the brain make us obsessed, addicted, or in love with a specific person causing us to alter our behaviour. Mazaritti studied 60 individuals: 20 were men and women who had fallen in love in the last 6 months; 20 others had suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder; and the other 20 were healthy individuals who were not in love (control group). By analysing blood samples from the lovers, Mazaritti discovered that low serotonin levels in new lovers were the same with those with obsessive-compulsive disorder. The study established a possible connection between romantic love and low levels of serotonin in the blood.
Though research on biochemistry helps us to explain what is happening to an individual when falling in love and forming attachments, it doesn't explain why we find some people more attractive than others. Evolutionary theories argue that the purpose of attraction is to procreate, to ensure that an individual's genes are passed on to the next generation. Buss et al found that in all cultures in the world, men generally desire younger woman as they are more fertile and therefore can bear more children, whereas woman desire older men as they have more resources for protecting each other and the offspring. Clarke and Hatfield found that men are more likely than woman to accept casual sex. This is because, from an evolutionary view, it is less risky for a man and they can pass on their genes and produce more offspring. However, a woman can only carry one child at a time and it is to her best advantage to make sure that she is given as much protection as possible for each offspring. Thus, woman are more selective when it comes to picking a partner for sex than men.
Wedekind wanted to see if body odour plays an important role in attraction. He tested the role of genes related to the immune system in mate selection. MHC genes are co-dominant, meaning that both sets of inherited genes have an effective on the child's immune system, so the more diverse the MHC genes of the parents, the better the immune system of the offspring. He recruited a group of 49 women and 44 men, with a wide range of MHC genes, and gave each men a clean t-shirt to wear for two nights. They were not allowed eat spicy food and had to use odour-free soap and aftershave. After the men returned the shirts, Wedekind put each shirt in a cardboard box with a sniffing hole at the top. Women were asked to come back at the mid-point of her menstrual cycle, where her sense of smell is at its strongest. They were presented with a different set of seven boxes. Three of the seven boxes contained t-shirts from men with similar MHC genes to women, the other three contained t-shirts from men with different MHC genes and one contained an unworn t-shirt as a control. The women were then asked to rate each of the seven t-shirts as pleasant or unpleasant. The women were more likely to prefer the scent of men with dissimilar MHC. According to Wedekind, choosing mHC-dissimilar mates serve three purposes: increasing fertility, producing healthy offsprings and reduce the risk of genetic disease. This explains why some women find a certain odor as absolutely beautiful or extremely dreadful. No one man spells good for everyone - it depends on who is sniffing him. However, this only explains a woman's attraction to men, but does not explain a men's attraction to woman.
Apart from biological factors, cognitive factors may also explain the origins of attraction. The attraction-similarity model suggests that we usually want to perceive our friends and partners that are similar to us, therefore we are more attracted to those that are similar to us. Market et al investigated the extent to which similarity is a factor in the way people choose partners. Using questionnaires, the researchers asked a large sample of young people to describe their ideal romantic partner. They were then asked to describe themselves. The results showed that the way people described themselves were similar to what their ideal partner was like. The study confirmed that people want partners who are similar to themselves. However, because the results were based on questionnaires, it may not be reliable as there is the problem of social desirability bias, which is where people want to make themselves sound better. But because this study was conducted on a relatively large sample, this enhances the validity of the study.
Self-esteem may also a play a role in relationship formation. Kiesler et al carried out an experiment where they administered a fake IQ on a group of men. They were then given fake scores. One group of men were told that they had scored off the charts - the best they had ever seen. Another group were told that there must have been a mistake with the IQ test because they had scored abnormally low. After the scores were given, the individual men waited in a waiting room for their pay for taking part in the study. During that time, a very attractive woman walked into the room. The experimenters wanted to see if the participant's self-esteem would affect their willingness to engage in discussion with the attractive woman. They found that men who had "high IQ scores" and therefore high self-esteem were more likely to engage in conversation with the woman much more quickly than men who were given low test scores. However, there are some limitations to this study in that attractiveness is very subjective. Some men may not find her attractive enough to talk to her, or different men prefer different types of women.
The cognitive analysis of attraction can also, to some extent, explain sociocultural factors in attraction. It seems that people prefer similarity in a partner, as well as a partner who can contribute positively to their self-esteem.
People who live close to one another tend to be similar and so probably also have the same social and cultural norms of what is attractive in a partner. Proximity refers to the physical or functional distance between individuals and suggests that the smaller the distance separating the individuals, the greater the chance of attraction taking place. Festinger et al studied student friendship patterns in university campus housing and found that the students were most friendly with those living next door, less friendly with those living two doors away and least friendly with those living at the end of the corridor. Likewise, Bossard found that couples in Chicago who lived within one block of each other were more likely to get married than those who lived two blocks apart. People prefer stimuli that they have seen more often. Close proximity clearly increases the chance of repeated exposure, which may lead to familiarity and a sense of trust. This theory might explain why long distance relationships hardly work and that people often fall out of love when they don't see their lover as often.
Saturday, April 7, 2012
Examine factors influencing bystanderism
The bystander effect is a situation where people do not offer help in emergency situations when other people are present, even when one is capable of doing so. This essay will examine the main factors that influence bystanderism.
One factor that influences bystanderism is pluralistic ignorance. When in a group, people often look to others to know how to react. This is known as informational social influence. This means that if people see that others are not reacting, then they will not react either. They will conform to the group norms of bystanderism. Latane and Darley carried out an experiment on pluralistic ignorance. They asked participants to sit in a waiting room before participating in an experiment. While they were waiting, they heard the female experimenter fall and cry out for help. They found that participants reacted more quickly and more often when they were the only ones in the waiting room compared to when they were alone sitting with a confederate who showed no reaction. During post-experimental interviews, the participants said that they had felt anxious when they heard the experimenter fall, but because the other people in the waiting room did not react, they thought that it was not an emergency. This experiment shows that people look to others to know how to react. However, participants were not in their natural environment, and so this study lacked ecological validity.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is diffusion of responsibility, which is a phenomenon that occurs in large groups where there is a tendency of individuals to refrain responsibility and to expect that someone else more competent would help. Latane and Darley conducted a laboratory experiment where they told student participants that they would be interviewed about living in a high-pressure urban environment. Anonymity was preserved as they were interviewed over the intercom. Some of the students were told that there were five other people in the discussion group, others were told there was just two and some there was only one. All the comments they heard from other groups were pre-recorded. At one point, one of the voices cried for help. When the students thought that they were the only person there, 85% rushed to help. When they thought there was another person there, this dropped to 65%. When they thought there were five other people, this dropped to 31%. Believing someone else would intervene lowers the probability of a person taking responsibility. This experiment shows that people tend to refrain from responsibility in larger groups.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is proximity of bystanderism. The smaller the distance between the bystander and the victim, the more directly responsible the bystander will feel - and thus they are more likely to help. Piliavin et al conducted a field experiment where confederates acted as strangers in need of help in the New York subway. This was an opportunity sample of over 4000 participants. They found that help was offered just as much in a crowded subway than in a non-crowded one, which suggest that it is difficult to refuse help in an emergency face-to-face situation. This shows that people are more likely to help when the distance between them and the victim is small. However, this study can be criticized on ethical grounds. Participants could not give their consent, as they did not know that they were participants in an experiment. They were also deceived because they are unaware that it is not a genuine emergency. Participants were also not debriefed as this would have been almost impossible. Participants may also experienced guilt, distress or anxiety. Another problem with this field experiment is that it was difficult to control. For example, we could question whether travellers on the train saw more than one trial. They are also difficult to replicate and time consuming. However, a main strength of this study was that it is high in ecological validity. The sample size was also very large and therefore it can be generalized.
Bystanderism is an complex issue and does not only depend on pluralistic ignorance, diffusion of responsibility and proximity of bystander, but also with age, identification with the victim and perception of emergency.
One factor that influences bystanderism is pluralistic ignorance. When in a group, people often look to others to know how to react. This is known as informational social influence. This means that if people see that others are not reacting, then they will not react either. They will conform to the group norms of bystanderism. Latane and Darley carried out an experiment on pluralistic ignorance. They asked participants to sit in a waiting room before participating in an experiment. While they were waiting, they heard the female experimenter fall and cry out for help. They found that participants reacted more quickly and more often when they were the only ones in the waiting room compared to when they were alone sitting with a confederate who showed no reaction. During post-experimental interviews, the participants said that they had felt anxious when they heard the experimenter fall, but because the other people in the waiting room did not react, they thought that it was not an emergency. This experiment shows that people look to others to know how to react. However, participants were not in their natural environment, and so this study lacked ecological validity.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is diffusion of responsibility, which is a phenomenon that occurs in large groups where there is a tendency of individuals to refrain responsibility and to expect that someone else more competent would help. Latane and Darley conducted a laboratory experiment where they told student participants that they would be interviewed about living in a high-pressure urban environment. Anonymity was preserved as they were interviewed over the intercom. Some of the students were told that there were five other people in the discussion group, others were told there was just two and some there was only one. All the comments they heard from other groups were pre-recorded. At one point, one of the voices cried for help. When the students thought that they were the only person there, 85% rushed to help. When they thought there was another person there, this dropped to 65%. When they thought there were five other people, this dropped to 31%. Believing someone else would intervene lowers the probability of a person taking responsibility. This experiment shows that people tend to refrain from responsibility in larger groups.
Another factor that influences bystanderism is proximity of bystanderism. The smaller the distance between the bystander and the victim, the more directly responsible the bystander will feel - and thus they are more likely to help. Piliavin et al conducted a field experiment where confederates acted as strangers in need of help in the New York subway. This was an opportunity sample of over 4000 participants. They found that help was offered just as much in a crowded subway than in a non-crowded one, which suggest that it is difficult to refuse help in an emergency face-to-face situation. This shows that people are more likely to help when the distance between them and the victim is small. However, this study can be criticized on ethical grounds. Participants could not give their consent, as they did not know that they were participants in an experiment. They were also deceived because they are unaware that it is not a genuine emergency. Participants were also not debriefed as this would have been almost impossible. Participants may also experienced guilt, distress or anxiety. Another problem with this field experiment is that it was difficult to control. For example, we could question whether travellers on the train saw more than one trial. They are also difficult to replicate and time consuming. However, a main strength of this study was that it is high in ecological validity. The sample size was also very large and therefore it can be generalized.
Bystanderism is an complex issue and does not only depend on pluralistic ignorance, diffusion of responsibility and proximity of bystander, but also with age, identification with the victim and perception of emergency.
Contrast two theories explaining altruism in humans
Altruistic behaviour is when people help others with no reward, and even at a cost to themselves. Darwin suggested that the evolution of altruism should be seen in relation to what could be advantageous to the group a person belongs to, rather than what could be advantageous by the individual alone. This essay will contrast two theories that explain altruism in humans: the kin selection theory, which is a biological explanation, and the empathy-altruism model, which is a cognitive explanation.
The Kin Selection Theory predicts that the degree of altruism depends on the number of genes shared by the helper and the individual that is being helped. The closer the relationship, the greater the chance for altruistic behaviour. This is supported by many animal studies, where animals tend to help those that are related to them. Dawkins proposed the "selfish gene theory" arguing that there is an innate drive for the survival and propagation of one's own genes. Organisms will try to make sure that their genes are passed on to the next generation. This may explain why mothers often protect their child and are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect them, whilst the vice versa is rare. However, this theory does not explain why some people work for charity or help strangers cross the road. It is also questionable whether animal behaviour can be generalized to human behaviour. Similarly, adoption does not benefit kin and thus cannot be explained by this theory.
By contrast, the Empathy-Altruism Model does explain why people help others that are not family. The Empathy-Altruism Model, by Batson et al, is based on the idea that an emotional response of empathy is generated when another person is perceived to be in need. According to Batson, two emotional responses are experienced when we see someone in need. The first one is personal distress, where we feel bad for the concern person, and this will lead to egoistic helping in order to make ourselves feel better. The second one is emphatic concern, where we feel like we ought to help others if we can, and this will lead to altruistic behaviour. In order words, if you feel empathy towards someone, you will help them regardless of what you gain from it. But if you do not feel empathy, you will weigh the costs and benefits before making a decision of whether to help.
Batson et al carried out an experiment where he asked students to listen to a recording of a student named Carol, who had broken both of her legs and is struggling to catch up with her school work. The students were divided into two groups: low empathy group and high empathy group. The students were then given a letter, asking them to meet up with Carol and share their lecture notes with her. Some participants were told that Carol would be finishing her work at home, and others were told that she would be in their class when she returned to school. Participants from the high empathy group were almost equally likely to help Carol, whether or not she would be in their class or not. Those from the low empathy group were more likely to help if they thought Carol would be in their class. The experiment concluded that if you feel empathy towards someone, you will be more likely to help.
Thus this theory explains what the Kin Selection Theory does not. However, there are also weaknesses of the Empathy-Altruism Model. The study only looked at short-term altruism - would the participants from the high empathy group continue to help Carol throughout her time in school? Interpretation of the results also do not take personality factors into account. It is also difficult to measure a person's level of empathy. But nonetheless, Batson et al's study is constantly being replicated, and the results are the same.
In conclusion, the Kin Selection Theory and the Empathy-Altruism Model both explain altruism in humans. We are more likely to help our family than our friends even when no empathy is felt, but with those that are not family we will help if we feel empathy towards them.
The Kin Selection Theory predicts that the degree of altruism depends on the number of genes shared by the helper and the individual that is being helped. The closer the relationship, the greater the chance for altruistic behaviour. This is supported by many animal studies, where animals tend to help those that are related to them. Dawkins proposed the "selfish gene theory" arguing that there is an innate drive for the survival and propagation of one's own genes. Organisms will try to make sure that their genes are passed on to the next generation. This may explain why mothers often protect their child and are willing to sacrifice themselves to protect them, whilst the vice versa is rare. However, this theory does not explain why some people work for charity or help strangers cross the road. It is also questionable whether animal behaviour can be generalized to human behaviour. Similarly, adoption does not benefit kin and thus cannot be explained by this theory.
By contrast, the Empathy-Altruism Model does explain why people help others that are not family. The Empathy-Altruism Model, by Batson et al, is based on the idea that an emotional response of empathy is generated when another person is perceived to be in need. According to Batson, two emotional responses are experienced when we see someone in need. The first one is personal distress, where we feel bad for the concern person, and this will lead to egoistic helping in order to make ourselves feel better. The second one is emphatic concern, where we feel like we ought to help others if we can, and this will lead to altruistic behaviour. In order words, if you feel empathy towards someone, you will help them regardless of what you gain from it. But if you do not feel empathy, you will weigh the costs and benefits before making a decision of whether to help.
Batson et al carried out an experiment where he asked students to listen to a recording of a student named Carol, who had broken both of her legs and is struggling to catch up with her school work. The students were divided into two groups: low empathy group and high empathy group. The students were then given a letter, asking them to meet up with Carol and share their lecture notes with her. Some participants were told that Carol would be finishing her work at home, and others were told that she would be in their class when she returned to school. Participants from the high empathy group were almost equally likely to help Carol, whether or not she would be in their class or not. Those from the low empathy group were more likely to help if they thought Carol would be in their class. The experiment concluded that if you feel empathy towards someone, you will be more likely to help.
Thus this theory explains what the Kin Selection Theory does not. However, there are also weaknesses of the Empathy-Altruism Model. The study only looked at short-term altruism - would the participants from the high empathy group continue to help Carol throughout her time in school? Interpretation of the results also do not take personality factors into account. It is also difficult to measure a person's level of empathy. But nonetheless, Batson et al's study is constantly being replicated, and the results are the same.
In conclusion, the Kin Selection Theory and the Empathy-Altruism Model both explain altruism in humans. We are more likely to help our family than our friends even when no empathy is felt, but with those that are not family we will help if we feel empathy towards them.
Treatment: Depression
- Examine biomedical, individual and group approaches to treatment
- Evaluate the use of biomedical, individual and group approaches to the treatment of one disorder
- Discuss the use of eclectic approaches in treatment
- Discuss the relationship between etiology and therapeutic approach in relation to one disorder
1. Biological:
- Janowsky et al suggested that depression may stem from an imbalance in neurotransmitters. He gave participants a drug that decreased noradrenaline in their body, and found that participants became profoundly depressed within minutes of having taken the drug. The fact that depression can be artificially induced by certain drugs suggest that some cases of depression might stem from a disturbance in neurotransmission.
- Teutung et al analysed and compared urine samples from depressed and non-depressed patients. He found that depressed people's urine had lower levels of noradrenaline and serotonin compared to non-depressed patients, and concluded that depressed people have lower levels of certain neurotransmitters.
Biomedical:
The biomedical approach is based on the assumption that if the problem is caused by biological malfunctioning, drugs can be used to restore the biological system. Since depression involves imbalances in neurotransmitters (typically low levels of serotonin/adrenaline), then drugs can be used to elevate a depressed mood. Most common groups of drugs are known as SSRIs - selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors - which increases the level of serotonin.
- Bernstein et al found that antidepressant drugs are an effective way to treat depression in the short run, significantly helping 60-80% of people.
- Kirsch and Sapirstein analysed the results from 19 studies, covering over 2318 patients who had been treated with SSRIs, and found that antidepressants were 25% more effective than a placebo.
- Cujipers et al found that medication was more effective in psychotherapy in improving symptoms, but that the best results were found in studies that used a combination of drugs and medication.
Studies Against:
- Blumenthal et al found that exercise was just as effective as SSRIs in treating depression in an elderly group of patients
- Leuchter and Witte found that depressive patients receiving drug treatments improved just as well as those receiving a placebo. Researchers argue that the brain does not respond to the same way to placebos and drugs, but people's mental health improved even when on a placebo, indicating that there are other ways to improve from depression other than antidepressants, which may have side effects.
Evaluation:
Generally, antidepressant drugs are an effective way to treat depression, but only in the short term. Just relying on drugs will not cure depression, as well as they have side effects, such as sexual problems, insomnia, and dry mouth. It is also argued that drugs do not target the problem, but just address the symptoms. It is therefore important for patients to use a combination of both drugs and therapy - drug itself is unlikely to make the disorder disappear permanently.
2. Cognitive:
- Beck et al suggested that cognitive distortion theory of depression, which are ways in which our mind convinces us of something that isn't true. He proposed that a person's cognitive vulnerability to depression is based on negative schemas, which are activated by stressful events. This gives the person a pessimistic attitude about themselves, the world and the future, making it very difficult for the person to see anything positive in life.
- Wessman and Beck assessed the thought processes of depressed people to establish if they were using negative schemas. Thought processes were assessed by using the dysfunctional attitude scale (DAS). Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire by ticking whether they agreed or disagreed with a set of statements. They found that depressed people were more likely to make negative assessments than non-depressed people.
- Alloy et al followed a sample of young Americans in their 20s for 6 years. Their thinking style was tested and they were placed in the "positive thinking group" and the "negative thinking group" according to their ways of thinking. After 6 years, they found that only 1% of those in the positive thinking group developed depression compared to 17% of those in the negative thinking group. The results indicate that there may be a link between negative cognitions and depression.
Individual Approach
The individual approach to depression is aimed to deal with distorted cognitions. Cognitive-Behaviourial therapy is an example of individual therapy, and it consists of identifying the negative thoughts assumed to underlie depression as well as helping the person to understand the connection between their negative thoughts and their emotional state.
Studies For:
- Rush et al found that CBT is an effective way of treating patients
- Dobson also found that cognitive therapy is more effective than drugs or a placebo
- Riggs et al studied effectiveness of CBT in combination with either a placebo or an SSRI. The researchers concluded that treatment with drugs and CBT is effective but that treatment with a placebo and CBT is almost as effective. This shows that CBT is effective.
- Nemereoff et al found that CBT in combination with drugs was the most effective in treating depression
Evaluation:
Cognitive therapies are cost-effective because they do not usually involve prolonged treatment. They are effective in treating the cause of the problem. No side effects have been found.Studies For:
- Rush et al found that CBT is an effective way of treating patients
- Dobson also found that cognitive therapy is more effective than drugs or a placebo
- Riggs et al studied effectiveness of CBT in combination with either a placebo or an SSRI. The researchers concluded that treatment with drugs and CBT is effective but that treatment with a placebo and CBT is almost as effective. This shows that CBT is effective.
- Nemereoff et al found that CBT in combination with drugs was the most effective in treating depression
Evaluation:
3. Group Approaches
Group approaches are for those that find it difficult to share with a therapist, and may be more encouraged to open up in discussions when they are surrounded with others that are going through a similar phase.
Studies For
- Hyun et al randomly assigned depressed adolescents to group CBT or a group receiving no treatment. They found group CBT to be extremely effective at relieving symptoms of depression, compared to the group receiving no treatment.
- Siporin reviewed 74 studies comparing individual and group treatment. Group treatment was found to be as effective as individual treatment in 75% in the studies, and more effective in the remaining 25%. In no case was individual therapy found to be more effective than group therapy.
Evaluation
Group approaches are effective, but dissatisfaction with the group or any of its members may lead to drop out and this will affect the effectiveness. Many factors need to be considered: confidentiality and privacy, must not be exclusion or group cohesion, conformity etc. Other people may not be comfortable in sharing. Studies have shown that group therapy is highly effective, and more effective than individual therapy.
Discuss cultural and gender variations in prevalence of disorders
This essay will focus on the cultural and gender variations in the prevalence of an affective disorder, depression, and an eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, and whether or not there is a cultural and gender difference in the onset of these disorders.
Individuals with bulimia are afraid of weight gain, and they will undertake binge eating and then use compensatory methods to lose weight, such as induced vomiting, excessive exercise and use of laxatives. Symptoms of bulimia include swollen salivary glands, due to vomiting, stomach and intestinal problems, feelings of guilt after binge eating and negative distorted image about their body weight.
According to statistical evidence, eating disorders are more common in females than in males. An estimated 35% of those with binge-eating disorders are males, with the rest of it being females. Eating disorders are also more common in teenagers, with 50% of girls between the ages 11-13 seeing themselves as overweight.
Fallon and Rozin wanted to see if there was a gender difference in body image. They showed US undergraduates figures of their own sex and asked them to indicate the figure that looked most like their shape and their ideal figure. Men selected very similar figures, whereas women tend to choose thinner attractive bodies that were much thinner than the shape they indicated as their own. They also asked men to choose a female figure that they thought was attractive to them, and found that the figure they found attractive was heavier than the ideal figure that women chose. Women believed that men prefer thinner women than they actually do. They concluded that there is a gender difference in the perception of body image, which explains why women are more susceptible to eating disorders than men.
There are also cultural differences in the susceptibility of bulimia. Lee, Hsu and Wing found that bulimia and anorexia was non-existent among the Chinese in Hong Kong. Chinese people are usually slim, and therefore they do not share the Western fear of being fat. The Chinese regard thinness as a sign of ill-health, unlike the Western view that it is a sign of self-discipline. Obesity is a sign as a sign of weak control in the West, whereas Chinese people see it as a sign of wealth and prosperity. Having grown up in Hong Kong myself, I have never met someone with an eating disorder, and the majority of people are either underweight or within the normal weight range.
Baguma et al also found cultural differences in the susceptibility of bulimia. It seems that the culture we live in really affects our eating behaviours. He asked British and Uganda students to examine a set of nude bodies ranging from very thin to very obese. When asked to rate which body they thought were ideal, the British people tend to chose very thin bodies, whereas Uganda students chose very obese bodies. In the Uganda society, fat is beautiful, and in the British society, slim is attractive. Thus this shows that cultural factors affect the way we think, which may explain why the Western society has such a high rate of people with eating disorders.
Similarly, there are also cultural and gender variations in the prevalence of depression. People with depression usually experience feelings of guilt and sadness, lack of enjoyment and pleasure in anything. They will have frequently negative thoughts, including low self-esteem and suicidal thoughts.
According to statistical evidence, women are two to three times more likely to be clinically depressed than men. Women are also more likely to experience several episodes of depression. This may be explained by gender norms or gender differences in society. Koss et al found that discrimination against women began early in their lives. Women are twice as likely to suffer sexual abuse in childhood and this pattern of victimization is maintained in adulthood, where women make up the majority of victims in physical assault.
Culture may also influence our onset of depression, as some cultures discourage depression more than others. For example, Chiao et al found that depression was higher in individualistic cultures than in collectivistic cultures. Similarly, Gabilondo et al found that depression occurs less frequently in Spain (collectivistic culture) and there there is a lower suicidal rate compared to Europe countries (individualistic). This is perhaps because collectivist groups discourage depression as they have more social support than individualistic cultures, who encourage independence.
In conclusion, there are cultural and gender variations in the onset of depression and bulimia. In both disorders, women are more vulnerable and susceptible in developing these disorders than men. Similarly, culture also plays an important role in the influence of these disorders. People are affected by their culture - if their culture rewards thinness, then they will strive to be thin.
Individuals with bulimia are afraid of weight gain, and they will undertake binge eating and then use compensatory methods to lose weight, such as induced vomiting, excessive exercise and use of laxatives. Symptoms of bulimia include swollen salivary glands, due to vomiting, stomach and intestinal problems, feelings of guilt after binge eating and negative distorted image about their body weight.
According to statistical evidence, eating disorders are more common in females than in males. An estimated 35% of those with binge-eating disorders are males, with the rest of it being females. Eating disorders are also more common in teenagers, with 50% of girls between the ages 11-13 seeing themselves as overweight.
Fallon and Rozin wanted to see if there was a gender difference in body image. They showed US undergraduates figures of their own sex and asked them to indicate the figure that looked most like their shape and their ideal figure. Men selected very similar figures, whereas women tend to choose thinner attractive bodies that were much thinner than the shape they indicated as their own. They also asked men to choose a female figure that they thought was attractive to them, and found that the figure they found attractive was heavier than the ideal figure that women chose. Women believed that men prefer thinner women than they actually do. They concluded that there is a gender difference in the perception of body image, which explains why women are more susceptible to eating disorders than men.
There are also cultural differences in the susceptibility of bulimia. Lee, Hsu and Wing found that bulimia and anorexia was non-existent among the Chinese in Hong Kong. Chinese people are usually slim, and therefore they do not share the Western fear of being fat. The Chinese regard thinness as a sign of ill-health, unlike the Western view that it is a sign of self-discipline. Obesity is a sign as a sign of weak control in the West, whereas Chinese people see it as a sign of wealth and prosperity. Having grown up in Hong Kong myself, I have never met someone with an eating disorder, and the majority of people are either underweight or within the normal weight range.
Baguma et al also found cultural differences in the susceptibility of bulimia. It seems that the culture we live in really affects our eating behaviours. He asked British and Uganda students to examine a set of nude bodies ranging from very thin to very obese. When asked to rate which body they thought were ideal, the British people tend to chose very thin bodies, whereas Uganda students chose very obese bodies. In the Uganda society, fat is beautiful, and in the British society, slim is attractive. Thus this shows that cultural factors affect the way we think, which may explain why the Western society has such a high rate of people with eating disorders.
Similarly, there are also cultural and gender variations in the prevalence of depression. People with depression usually experience feelings of guilt and sadness, lack of enjoyment and pleasure in anything. They will have frequently negative thoughts, including low self-esteem and suicidal thoughts.
According to statistical evidence, women are two to three times more likely to be clinically depressed than men. Women are also more likely to experience several episodes of depression. This may be explained by gender norms or gender differences in society. Koss et al found that discrimination against women began early in their lives. Women are twice as likely to suffer sexual abuse in childhood and this pattern of victimization is maintained in adulthood, where women make up the majority of victims in physical assault.
Culture may also influence our onset of depression, as some cultures discourage depression more than others. For example, Chiao et al found that depression was higher in individualistic cultures than in collectivistic cultures. Similarly, Gabilondo et al found that depression occurs less frequently in Spain (collectivistic culture) and there there is a lower suicidal rate compared to Europe countries (individualistic). This is perhaps because collectivist groups discourage depression as they have more social support than individualistic cultures, who encourage independence.
In conclusion, there are cultural and gender variations in the onset of depression and bulimia. In both disorders, women are more vulnerable and susceptible in developing these disorders than men. Similarly, culture also plays an important role in the influence of these disorders. People are affected by their culture - if their culture rewards thinness, then they will strive to be thin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)