Download RESEARCH METHODS IN PSYCHOLOGY – OBSERVATIONS

D:\81897515.doc
APPROACHES IN PSYCHOLOGY – INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE STUDIES
The Individual Differences Perspective tries to examine exceptional people and the
things that make us unique – things like personality, intelligence, mental health and
abnormality as well as differences due to race, culture or gender. This approach
assumes that DISPOSITIONS are important factors in how people behave and it tries
to correct the tendency of the other perspectives to look only at “average” or “typical”
people. Here are some examples.
Thigpen & Cleckley wrote a groundbreaking case study in 1954.
The background was the debate about whether Multiple
Personality Disorder (MPD) really existed. The aim was to treat a
young housewife (“Eve White”) suffering from MPD. Eve White
had two “alters” (other personalities) referred to as Eve Black and
Jane, who had different memories and behaviour patterns; for
example whereas Eve White was timid and anxious, Eve Black
was thrill-seeking and sexually confident. Psychometric tests and
projective tests backed up the idea that these were genuinely
different personalities. Thigpen & Cleckley concluded that MPD
sufferers have more than one personality but that through therapy
these “alters” can be merged to create one healthy and stable
personality.
The individual difference is a
DIAGNOSIS OF
SCHIZOPHRENIA. The
situation is completely realistic,
so there were real risks in the
experiment and medical staff
were deceived. The conclusion
is that labels are “sticky” – once
someone has been labelled (eg
as “schizophrenic”) then
everything they do and say is
interpreted in the light of that
label.
The individual difference is
the PERSONALITY and the
abnormal condition of MPD.
The testing was a mixture of
psychometric tests (eg IQ)
and projective tests (eg
inkblot). The participant
(Christine Sizemore) later
condemned the researchers
methods and conclusions,
claiming she had been treated
like a guinea pig and had
NOT been cured.
David Rosenhan conducted this important study on medical
misdiagnosis in 1973. It was a field experiment based on the
observations of “pseudopatients” in mental hospitals compared
with a university health centre. The background was previous
research suggesting doctors found it very difficult to agree on
diagnoses of mental illnesses. The 8 pseudopatients (Rosenhan
was one!) got admitted to hospitals claiming they heard voices;
they then returned to normal behaviour and tried to be released.
On average this took 19 days and the patients’ (normal)
behaviour was interpreted as abnormal by the staff. Rosenhan
concluded that we cannot tell the sane from the insane in mental
hospitals and suggested this is because of the “stickiness of labels”.
Marc Griffiths carried out this unusual study in 1994. It was a
natural experiment carried out under field conditions, using a
group of 30 regular gamblers (RGs) and a control group of nonregular gamblers (NRGs). The background was the previous
research by Griffiths and others into the nature of addiction. The
aim was to see if RGs had more skill at fruit machines than
NRGs and if they thought about gambling in a different way.
The gamblers verbalised their thoughts and were interviewed
later: the RGs had more irrational cognitions about gambling;
they spent their £3 stake faster and lost more often when asked
to verbalise. Griffiths concluded that the regular gamblers adopt
different cognitive strategies from NRGs – they hold irrational
beliefs about the game and exaggerate the importance of skill
rather than luck.
The individual difference is
ADDICTION TO
GAMBLING. The situation is
quite realistic, right down to
participants choosing their fruit
machine. Getting gamblers to
verbalise their thoughts may
not be realistic and the
interviews might suffer from
demand characteristics. The
conclusion is that gamblers
have distinct cognitive
strategies and cognitive therapy
might help people with
gambling problems.
D:\81897515.doc
APPROACHES IN PSYCHOLOGY – INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
1. Explain what individual differences are studied by Thigpen & Cleckley.
2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of using psychometric tests to measure
personality?
3. In what way was the study reductionist?
4. What ethical problems are there with Thigpen & Cleckley’s case study?
5. Explain what individual differences were studied by Rosenhan.
6. How could a different method be used to study medical misdiagnosis?
7. What did Rosenhan mean by “the stickiness of labels”??
8. How is Rosenhan’s study similar to the research by Thigpen & Cleckley?
9. Explain the individual differences studied by Griffiths.
10. What sampling problems were there with this study?
11. According to Griffiths, how do the thought processes of gamblers differ from
ordinary people?
12. What type of data (quantitative or qualitative) did Griffiths produce and what
are the advantages of this?
13. In what way is the Individual Differences Approach a particularly useful
application of psychology?
14. Why is the Individual Differences Approach hard to generalise from?
D:\81897515.doc
APPROACHES IN PSYCHOLOGY – INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
1. Explain what individual differences are studied by Thigpen & Cleckley.
The ABNORMAL condition called MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER
(MPD)
2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of using psychometric tests to measure
personality?
STRENGTHS = gives quantitative data which allows for easy comparisons; quick and
easy to test large groups at once; requires no special training to administer
WEAKNESSES = does not give qualitative data which provides insight; number
scores can be reductionist since two people can answer differently but get the same
total score; can be invalid if people give socially desirable answers
3. In what way was the study reductionist?
The medical model of mental health means that Eve White’s condition was treated as
a MEDICAL PROBLEM in need of therapy
4. What ethical problems are there with Thigpen & Cleckley’s case study?
Eve White was treated as a guinea pig by the researchers who used her to launch their
careers with a best-selling book and a movie tie-in; Eve White didn’t get better but
actually developed MORE personalities; Christine Sizemore (Eve) later wrote that she
was exploited by the researchers
5. Explain what individual differences were studied by Rosenhan.
Diagnosis of schizophrenia
6. How could a different method be used to study medical misdiagnosis?
Lab experiment to see if doctors can tell genuinely ill patients from pseudopatients
7. What did Rosenhan mean by “the stickiness of labels”??
A label is hard to escape because it affects how other people interpret everything you
do and say
8. How is Rosenhan’s study similar to the research by Thigpen & Cleckley?
Both focus on mental abnormality ESPECIALLY how to diagnosis it
9. Explain the individual differences studied by Griffiths.
Thought processes of gambling addicts
10. What sampling problems were there with this study?
Self-selecting sample would not contain hard-core gamblers (non representative)
11. According to Griffiths, how do the thought processes of gamblers differ from
ordinary people?
More irrational; exaggerate skill over luck
12. What type of data (quantitative or qualitative) did Griffiths produce and what
are the advantages of this?
Qualitative: get gamblers’ thoughts in their own words
D:\81897515.doc
13. In what way is the Individual Differences Approach a particularly useful
application of psychology?
It focuses on dispositions (intelligence etc) that are ignored by mainstream
psychology; also how to help people with these dispositions
14. Why is the Individual Differences Approach hard to generalise from?
Samples tend to be unique and hard to compare