Psychology of the Early Years - PSA521 - 2024 PDF

PSA521: Psychology of the Early Years Semester 1 Dr Daniel J. A. Rhind Lecture Overview Aggression Social Learning Theory Prosocial Behaviour Bystander behaviour Reading = Chapter 13 in Hogg & Vaughan What is aggression? Which of these are ‘aggression’?...

PSA521: Psychology of the Early Years Semester 1 Dr Daniel J. A. Rhind Lecture Overview Aggression Social Learning Theory Prosocial Behaviour Bystander behaviour Reading = Chapter 13 in Hogg & Vaughan What is aggression? Which of these are ‘aggression’? Causes physical harm Causes psychological harm Harm to people, animals and property? Harm in the context of war Harm during a boxing match The victim thinks that harm has occurred Smacking a child Accidentally hitting someone Defining Aggression Behaviour intended to harm another of the same species (Scherer, et al. 1975) Behaviour resulting in personal injury or destruction of property (Bandura, 1973) Operationalising aggression: 1. Analogues of behaviour (punching a doll, Bandura, et al. 1963) 2. Signal of intention (express willingness to use violence, Geen 1978) 3. Self-ratings (Leyens, et al. 1975) 4. Rated by others (Eron, 1982) 5. Indirect spreading rumours (Lansford, et al. 2012) Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard, et al. 1939) Situational Influence “To say that an individual has a trait is not to say that his or her overt behaviour is insensitive to the environment. Rather, the behavioural manifestation of a given genotype depends critically on inputs from, and reactions to, the environment.” (Kenrick et al., 2003, p.12) Bandura et al. (1963) 4 and 5 year olds watched an adult play with a ‘Bobo’ doll in 4 conditions: 1. Adult was physically aggressive towards the doll (live) 2. Adult was physically aggressive towards the doll (video) 3. Adult was physically aggressive towards the doll cartoon) 4. Control condition Bandura & Walters (1963) Results Social Learning Theory Developed by Bandura (1977) Applying Social Learning Theory to aggression: 1. A person’s previous experiences of others’ aggressive behaviour 2. How successful aggressive behaviour has been in the past 3. The current likelihood that an aggressive person will be either rewarded or punished 4. The complex array of cognitive, social and environmental factors in the situation Task ? Spanking Children (Straus et al., 2003) Longitudinal study over 2 years Recorded how often the child was spanked (0-3+/week) Positive relationship between spanking and anti-social behaviour of the child Children who were not spanked showed less ASB after 2 years Violent Lyrics (Anderson et al., 2003) Violent Films (Black & Bevan, 1992) Placebo (Begue et al., 2009) Controlled naturalistic field experiment Male students given non-alcoholic cocktail Thought it was alcoholic (placebo effect) Acted more aggressively Key Concepts Life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short” (Hobbes, 1651) Positive psychology (Seligman, 1991) Prosocial = behaviour that has positive social consequences and that contributes to the physical or psychological well-being of another person (Wispe, 1972) Altruism = an act that is meant to benefit another person rather than oneself – true altruism is selfless Biological Perspective Humans have innate tendencies to help others, this promotes survival Stevens et al. (2005): Mutualism - cooperative behaviour benefits the co- operator as well as others Kin selection – those who cooperate are biased towards blood relatives because it helps propagate their own genes. Fitness altruism – “How Could natural selection ever smile upon organisms that sacrifice their own reproductive fitness for another’s benefit”? (Turner, 2005; p. 317) Empathy (Batson et al., 1996) Modelling (Rushton & Teachman, 1978) Bryan & Test (1967) Modelling can also work for adults Condition 1 – driver passed a woman whose car had a flat tyre and was being helped by a man The driver then passed another woman by her car needing assistance Condition 2 – the driver just passed the 2nd car Drivers in condition 1 were 50% more likely to help Hornstein (1970) People observed a model returning a lost wallet Condition 1 – Model was pleased to help Condition 2 – Model showed no strong emotion Condition 3 – Model was displeased at the bother of having to help Participants then found a ‘lost’ wallet Condition 1 helped more than 2 which helped more than 3 Learning by vicarious experience Tea Time Task: Kitty Genovese Murder Late one night in March 1964, Kitty is walking home after work In a respectable neighbourhood within Queens in New York In the half an hour it took to kill her, no one helped Half an hour later, anonymous call, didn’t want to “get involved” 38 people hear the screams, but did not act Why? Apathy? Indifference? Moral callousness? Bystander Effect People are less likely to help in an emergency when they are with others than when alone The greater the number, the less likely it is that anyone will help Emergency: Involves danger for people or property Unusual event Not foreseen Requires instant action Wide ranging from a fire to someone being mugged Key Study: Latane & Darley (1968) ‘Where there is smoke there is fire’ (Latané & Darley, 1968) Alone (75)% took action 2 strangers 38% took action 2 passive confederates 10% took action Key Theory: Latane & Darley’s 5 Stage Cognitive Model Bystander apathy (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1977) Explaining the Bystander Effect Diffusion of responsibility – passing the responsibility to act to other available people Audience inhibition – fear of a social blunder Social influence – passive behaviour of others represent a model for how to act 3 in 1 (Latane & Darley, 1976) Summary Aggression Social Learning Theory Prosocial Behaviour Bystander behaviour Reading = Chapter 13 in Hogg & Vaughan