Psych 105 Study Notes PDF

Psych 105 Lecture/Study Notes Welcome to Introductory Psychology Part 2! My Educational Background BA in Psychology (Douglas College) ○ Specialization: Applied Theory and Research ○ Supervisor: David Prime MA in Philosophy (Georgia State University) ○ Specialization: Neurophil...

Psych 105 Lecture/Study Notes Welcome to Introductory Psychology Part 2! My Educational Background BA in Psychology (Douglas College) ○ Specialization: Applied Theory and Research ○ Supervisor: David Prime MA in Philosophy (Georgia State University) ○ Specialization: Neurophilosophy ○ Supervisors: Eddy Nahmias and Eyal Aharoni ○ Lab: Cooperation, Conflict, and Cognition Lab PhD in Psychology (University of Alberta) ○ Specialization: Social Psychology ○ Supervisor: Kyle Nash ○ Lab: Nash Social Neuroscience Lab General Administrative Stuff If you have a question about course content (e.g. “what is an independent variable”), put it in eclass COURSE QUESTIONS. If you have a question that pertains only to you, use this email: [email protected]. I will do my best to respond every email within 24 hours. However, please check the syllabus before emailing me (control-F is your friend). Please put “Psych 105” in the email heading/subject so I know it is from this class. Do not email the TAs. Their job is marking. 4 Study Tips 1. Test yourself (especially on definitions!!) 2. Categorize information into chunks/categories 3. Don’t focus on memorizing, focus on understanding (think about the meaning, think about how it connects to other concepts, think about how it connects to you and your experience) 4. Expose yourself to the content multiple times and in multiple ways. Optional Resource Crash Course Psychology (2, 15-16, 18-24, 26, 28-40) https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGMVCsud2sqX1F5BkUp7yiIFcGtFjb1hZ Introduction to Psychology (3, 5-7, 9, 15-20) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6A08EB4EEFF3E91F They are in a different order than the book (especially Bloom’s lectures), and they include material from Psychology 104 as well. Lecture Videos I have posted video recordings of past 105 lectures on eclass. This is another way to expose yourself to the content more than once. In Class Questions It might be scary to ask questions in a big class, but I strongly strongly strongly encourage it. It makes the class more interesting, and it will help you learn. If there are too many questions, I will eventually say “no more questions for today”, because we have a schedule to keep. However, if this happens, I will be very happy. Purpose of the Notes These PowerPoint notes are to help you study, but they are not required reading. You can completely ignore these notes and still get 100% on the exams. The exams will be based on the lectures and the textbook. These notes will be in roughly in the same order as my lectures, but they will not be exactly the same. These notes will contain the key/main ideas from the lectures and textbook, but they will NOT cover every testable idea. Some chapters might be more complete than others.  Chapter 2 Psychology: The Science of Behavior Correlation Correlation: when two variables tend to vary (change) together. Positive correlation: when one variable increases, the other also increases. Negative correlation: when one variable increases, the other also decreases. No correlation: the variables do not change together. Quantifying Correlation Correlations range from -1 to +1. 0 means no correlation. -1 means a perfect negative correlation. +1 means a perfect positive correlation. In other words, the farther away from zero a correlation is, the stronger it is. Representing Correlations on a Scatterplot Correlation of +1 Correlation of -1 Representing Correlations on a Scatterplot Correlation of around.8 Correlation of around -.8 Representing Correlations on a Scatterplot Correlation of around.2 Correlation of around -.2 Representing Correlations on a Scatterplot Correlation of 0 The next 7 slides contain the most important ideas in this course. You Cannot Infer Causation From Correlation! Correlation: A and B are related, they vary together. Causation: A causes B. Suppose we find evidence of correlation (we find that A correlates with B). There are 3 possibilities: 1. A causes B 2. B causes A 3. C (something you did not measure) causes A and B The fact that A and B are correlated DOES NOT TELL YOU which of those 3 options is true! Example: Chocolate and Happiness We get 100 people and ask them “how many chocolates have you eaten this week” and “how happy are you on a scale of 1-10”. We find a positive correlation between chocolate consumption and happiness. That means people who eat more chocolate are happier on average. Example: Chocolate and Happiness It is very tempting to conclude that eating chocolate MAKES you happier, or LEADS TO happiness, or CAUSES happiness. But that’s BAD REASONING. There are 3 possibilities: 1. Eating chocolate causes happiness (that is ONE possibility) 2. Being happy causes chocolate consumption (being happy makes you eat chocolate for some reason) 3. Something else (that you have not measured) causes BOTH happiness and chocolate consumption. For example, maybe being rich causes you to be happy, and it causes you to eat more chocolate. Takeaway When A and B are correlated, there are 3 possibilities you have to consider. 1. A causes B 2. B causes A 3. C (something you did not measure) causes both I’m saying this again… because it is important! Ok… but we care about whether A causes B. How do we figure out whether it does?? Psychology’s Secret Weapon: Experiments Experimentation is the key way that we establish causation. Here are the steps to an experiment in psychology: 1. We get a sample. 2. We RANDOMLY ASSIGN people to two different conditions. 3. We do something to group 1 and don’t do it (or do less of it) to the group 2. Group 1 is the experimental group, group 2 is the control group. 4. We measure something in both groups. The variable that we manipulate/control is called the INDEPENDENT VARIABLE. The variable that we measure is called the DEPENDENT VARIABLE. Example: Chocolate and Happiness Let’s go through those steps with the chocolate example. 1. We get a sample. 2. We randomly assign the people to two groups. 3. We tell one group to eat one chocolate bar every day for a week. We tell the other group to eat no chocolate bars at all for a week. 4. We measure their happiness at the end of the week (“how happy are you on a scale of 1-10”). Suppose that the average happiness in the chocolate group is 9/10, and the average happiness in the no chocolate group is 5/10. Then we would have strong evidence that eating chocolate causes happiness. Example: Chocolate and Happiness In that experiment, amount of chocolate eaten is the INDEPENDENT VARIABLE. It was the variable that we manipulated/controlled. Happiness is the DEPENDENT VARIABLE. It was the variable that we measured at the end. Maybe read those 7 slides again. Scientific Attitudes Curiosity- a desire to figure out what’s going on. “How does that work?” Skepticism- an unwillingness to believe in the absence of evidence. “How do you know that’s true? Show me.” Nullius in verba- take no one’s word for it. Open-mindedness- a willingness to change one’s mind, a willingness to be proven wrong. “I might be wrong.” 5 Steps of the Scientific Process 1. Identify a question of interest. 2. Gather information and form a hypothesis. 3. Test the hypothesis by collecting data. 4. Analyze the data and draw a tentative conclusion/interpretation. 5. After repeating steps 1-4, start to build a body of knowledge. Hindsight vs Prediction It is easy to explain something in hindsight (i.e. after it happens). It is also easy to tell yourself “I already knew that” after you learn something. In science, we are not satisfied with explaining things we already know. We demand that theories lead to PREDICTIONS about things we have not observed yet. Hypotheses and Theories A hypothesis is a specific testable statement. Often, it takes the form of an “If- Then” statement. E.g. “If I administer this antidepressant to this group, Then their depression will be lower than the placebo group” You can think of a theory as a network of hypotheses and other statements that are logically connected. E.g. Newtonian theory is a set of laws about motion that are related, and from which you can deduce predictions. Variable A variable is just a trait/factor/characteristic that can VARY. This means it can be different between people (or different for one person over time). In psychology, here are some of the variables we care about: happiness, anxiety, intelligence, sexual preference, memory ability, aggressiveness, etc. Operational Definition Many of the variables in psychology that we want to measure (happiness, intelligence, anxiety) are vague and difficult to define. This is a problem because in science it is important for things to be well- defined. Our solution is to have operational definitions. An operational definition is a specific, measurable definition of a variable. For example, in psychology we typically operationally define “intelligence” as “IQ score”. We typically operationally define “happiness” as “your score on a happiness questionnaire”. These definitions are specific and measurable. Self-Report The simplest way to measure what people are thinking is: ASK THEM. “How extraverted are you on a scale of 1-7?” “How happy are you on a scale of 1-7?” “How anxious are you on a scale of 1-7?” These are all examples of self-report. Behavioral Measures We also use measures of behavior. Sometimes this gives us different results. E.g. a child might self-report that they feel less aggressive. But we could measure how many fights they get into (a behavioral measure). Physiological Measures Scanning brains, neurotransmitter levels, galvanic skin response, heart rate, etc. My supervisor (Kyle Nash) argues that it is important to use all 3 measures: self-report, behavior, and physiological measurement. Reliability and Validity OF MEASUREMENTS Reliability: does a test/measurement yield consistent results. E.g. if I give an IQ test to Susan on Monday and she gets an IQ score of 143, but she gets an IQ score of 71 on Friday, that would indicate LOW reliability. Validity: does a test/measurement measure what it is supposed to measure. E.g. does an IQ test measure intelligence or not. NOTE: a test can be reliable and NOT valid. If I measure your pinkie toe length to estimate your intelligence, that would be an extremely reliable test (it would give me the same score every time. But it would NOT be valid (it is not measuring intelligence). Ideally, we want our psychological measurements to have BOTH reliability and validity. Case Studies Study one person (or a small number of similar people) in depth/detail. This method is used a lot in neuroscience: if someone has brain damage, we study them in detail to find out 1. which part(s) of the brain were damaged, and 2. what they can’t do anymore. With animals, we don’t have to rely on case studies of brain damage. We just damage their brains on purpose and measure what they can’t do anymore. Naturalistic Observation Observing people’s behavior in their “natural habitat” (real life, not in the lab). This is a good method for generating ideas and seeing patterns. It is usually not good enough by itself. E.g. a psychologist might observe (with the school’s permission) kids interacting (including bullying) in a playground. They might notice some patterns. But in order to get your idea published, you would probably also have to do a more controlled study. Survey Research Administering a set of questions to a large sample of people. There are two important terms to remember when it comes to sampling: sample and population. Population: the group of people you’re interested in drawing a conclusion about. Sample: the group of people that you get to join your study. Representative Sample A sample is REPRESENTATIVE if it has demographics that are similar to the population. E.g. if the population is 50% female, but the sample is 100% male, then that sample would NOT be representative. One method for making your sample more representative is to use RANDOM SAMPLING. This means you randomly pick people to be in your study. NOTE: random sampling is NOT the same as random assignment. Random sampling is about picking people to be in your study. Random assignment is about putting the people ALREADY IN YOUR STUDY into groups. Between Subjects VS Within Subjects Between Subjects Experiments (also known as Between Groups Experiments): Randomly assign people to two (or more) groups. One gets one level of the independent variable, one group gets another level of the independent variable. If I do not specific what type of experiment I’m talking about, assume I’m talking about this kind. Within Subjects Experiments (also known as Repeated Measures Experiments): Take one group of people and give them BOTH levels of the independent variable. Between Subjects VS Within Subjects Suppose I want to know if visualizing something or saying something out loud is a better method of memorization. In a between-subjects experiment, there would be two groups. One group would do visualizing, one would say the things out loud. In a within-subjects experiment, there would be one group. They would do visualizing, then say the things out loud. NOTE: in within-subjects experiments, you have to randomize the order in which the levels of the independent variable are presented. This is called “counterbalancing”. E.g. half the people do visualizing first, half the people do “saying it out loud” first. Manipulating Multiple Independent Variables Suppose my hypothesis is that the effect of coffee on mood depends on the temperature in the room. More specifically, when the room is cold, coffee makes you happier, but when the room is hot, coffee makes you less happy. To test this, I would have to manipulate 2 independent variables: coffee consumption and room temperature. There would be four conditions: 1. coffee and high room temperature, 2. no coffee and high room temperature, 3. coffee and low room temperature, 4. no coffee and low room temperature. If my hypothesis was supported, that would be an example of an INTERACTION EFFECT, where the effect of one independent variable DEPENDS ON the other independent variable. Validity of EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN These two kinds of validity relate to “did you do your experiment correctly” Internal validity: WITHIN your experiment, can you be confident that the change in the independent variable CAUSED a change in the dependent variable. External validity: will the results GENERALIZE OUTSIDE OF your experimental context. Confounding Variables A confounding variable is anything that is different between the two groups (in an experiment) OTHER THAN the independent variable. E.g. suppose I use teaching method A with Vancouver students, and use teaching method B with Edmonton students. And Edmonton students get better grades. I say to myself “Wow… teaching method B caused the students to do better!” I can’t say that. Because there is a confounding variable: location. Maybe students in Edmonton are just smarter, maybe they stay inside more. Maybe they’re less depressed because they see the sun. Etc. Placebo Effect Placebo effect: if you believe something will cure you, it often will cure you (even if it is a water pill or some other inert substance). To control for this, medical trials (including ones involving psychotropic drugs) have to have a placebo condition. Double Blind Experiment Even though we hold up open-mindedness as an ideal in science, the truth is that scientists want their theories to be true. One way to control for any bias a scientist has in favour of his hypothesis is a DOUBLE BLIND EXPERIMENT. This means that neither the participants nor the experimenter knows who is in the experimental group and who is in the control group. If only the participants don’t know, that is a SINGLE BLIND EXPERIMENT. The p-value The p-value is the probability of getting your results IF there is no effect in the population. It is between 0 and 1. Lower number means lower probability. E.g. suppose you are looking to see if men play more video games than women on average. You get a sample and find that men play (on average) 10 hours per week, and women play (on average) 1 hour per week. It is POSSIBLE that in the population there is NO DIFFERENCE between men and women, and that we just accidentally sampled more men who like video games. But it is VERY UNLIKELY, so we would get a low p-value (maybe 0.0001). If this is unclear, watch the lecture again or ask a question in the eclass discussion board. Statistical Significance In the social and biological sciences, we set a cutoff. We say to ourselves “if the p-value is less than a cutoff, we will conclude that the difference is real”. We typically set the cutoff at 0.05. This means if the p-value is LESS THAN 0.05, we conclude that we have found a real effect or real difference. Replication Suppose Bob does a study and finds a certain pattern (e.g. drinking tea makes you smarter). It is very important that someone else does the study again (that would be a replication study). Bob might be bad at statistics, or the result might have been statistical noise (not a real effect). If Sally does the study again and finds the same pattern, we would say the result has been replicated. Replication Crisis Unfortunately, in psychology a lot of patterns do not replicate very well! This came to light in the early 2010s in what has come to be known as the “replication crisis”. Part of the reason for this is that many psychologists would do a study, and then do many different statistical tests until they finally got one result that had a p-value below 0.05 (i.e. a “statistically significant” effect). Then they would just report the one significant effect. This practice is virtually guaranteed to produce non-replicable results. Luckily, important changes are being made (like preregistration). WEIRD Problem WEIRD countries are Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich Democracies. I.e. Canada, US, Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand. Most psychology studies have historically been done in WEIRD countries. But there is a renewed emphasis in psychology on CROSS-CULTURAL REPLICATION (doing the studies again in other cultures). Ethical Requirements Informed consent: you have to tell participants about what the study will involve, and ask them to give consent (often through a consent form). Sometimes we give participants incomplete information or use some deception (because we don’t want participants to know what the study is about). If we do this, we have to debrief them at the end and tell them what the study was actually about. Measures of Central Tendency Mean: the average (add the scores up, divide by the number of scores). This is the most commonly used measure of “central tendency”. However, one possible downside is that this measure is sensitive to outliers. Median: the middle score (rank order the scores, find the one in the middle). We use this for distributions with outliers or extreme values. Mode: the most commonly occurring score. Standard Deviation Roughly speaking, the standard deviation is how far away on average are scores from the mean. A distribution with a large standard deviation will be more spread out. Suppose there are two classes, each with an AVERAGE (mean) grade of around 70. Class A has the following grades: 50, 61, 65, 70, 74, 79, 92. Class B has the following grades: 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73. Class A will have a much larger standard deviation.  Chapter 9 Language and Thinking Rules of Language Syntax: subset of grammatical rules that relates to the order of words (e.g. in English we put the adjective before the noun- “red car”, but in French it is the opposite). Semantics: rules for what terms and sentences mean. See example below. E.g. the sentence “the cat is on the mat” means → Properties of Language Generativity: language enables one to produce a potentially infinite number of messages. Displacement: language enables one to communicate about events that are not in front of you. Structure of Language Surface structure: related to the idea of syntax. It is the literal order of the letters and the words. Deep structure: the meaning of the sentence. “John loves Mary” and “Mary is loved by John” have different surface structures but the same deep structure. The sentence “the police must stop drinking after midnight” has a specific surface structure, but it could have at least 2 different deep structures. It could mean “the police themselves must not drink after midnight” OR “the police must stop other people from drinking after midnight (because of a curfew or something”. Phonemes and Morphemes Phonemes: smallest units of sound in a language (think “phone-ring-ring” = sound). English has 44 phonemes, some languages have more, some have less. Each letter is at least one phoneme (letters like “A” have several: think about how it sounds in “cake” vs “care”). Sounds like “th” would also be phonemes. Morphemes: smallest units of meaning (morpheme starts with M, just like meaning- use that to memorize it). The word “relearning” has 3 morphemes: re (again) learn (acquire knowledge) ing (present participle). A morpheme is NOT the same as a syllable. A word like “apple” has 2 syllables, but it is just one morpheme (apple). Apples would have two morphemes (s is a morpheme when it is the end of a word, it means plural). Processing Bottom-up processing: building up from sensory signals to a concept. Top-down: having a concept/expectation at the beginning and imposing it on incoming sensory signals. Pragmatics How context helps us understand meaning. E.g. if I say “you have a green light”, that could mean “you possess a light (flashlight or something) which is green” or “you have permission to proceed with what you’re doing”. Context would help you figure out which meaning I have in mind. Language and the Brain Broca’s area (left frontal lobe): language PRODUCTION Wernicke’s area (left temporal lobe): language COMPREHENSION For males, language is more strongly lateralized (i.e. more exclusively produced by the left hemisphere). For females, the two hemispheres are more equally involved. Language Acquisition BF Skinner argued that language was acquired purely though operant conditioning (reinforcement and punishment). Noam Chomsky argued that children are born with a “language acquisition device”, meaning that some understanding is built in from the beginning. He calls the innate principles which all languages have in common “universal grammar”. Arguments for Language Acquisition Device Poverty of stimulus: Chomskyans argue that there simply is not enough data in childhood experience to generate language abilities by mere operant conditioning. Something has to be built in from the beginning. Critical period: there is some evidence that language acquisition can only occur during a specific developmental window. This suggests a biological component (think about puberty as an analogy: it is biologically preprogrammed and must occur during a specific developmental window). However, many Chomskyans were surprised by the emergence of ChatGPT, since it is essentially a Skinnerian system (it does not need a lot of understanding built in at the beginning: it is just trained on a large body of data, in part through something called “reinforcement learning”). Developmental Timetable Know the basic timeline. Bilingualism Easier to learn a second language fluently if you learn it when you’re younger. Some researchers prefer to speak of this as a “sensitive” period rather than a “critical” period. Roughly “sensitive” means it is EASIER to learn a language when you’re young, whereas “critical” means you can ONLY learn a language fully when you’re young. There are some cognitive advantages associated with being bilingual, including greater mental flexibility. Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis (Sapir-Whorf) Benjamin Whorf and Edward Sapir argued that which language we speak determines how we think. They argued for an extreme version of this idea, wherein people who spoke different languages would have fundamentally different perceptions of the world. Most psycholinguists don’t hold to the extreme version, but you can get interesting effects in the lab. E.g. Russians divide blue into two colors (see image), and they are quicker than English speakers at noticing different shades of what we call blue. Sign Language and Apes There have been several attempts to teach sign language to non-human apes (mostly chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas). Through repeated deliberate instruction and conditioning, you can get an ape to have some competence with a few dozen or a few hundred signs. By contrast, kids acquire language without much instruction at all: they seem to almost effortlessly absorb language when they’re exposed to it. Types of Thinking Propositional thought: thought that takes the form of linguistic statements (“Paris is the capital of France”, “force is equal to mass times acceleration”). Imaginal thought: thought that takes the form of sensory images (could be visual, auditory, tactile, etc). Motoric thought: thought that is about plans for movement. Concepts and Propositions Concepts: basic units of semantic memory and/or understanding Propositions: combinations of concepts into statements. We have a concept of “tree” and a concept of “leaves”. “All trees have leaves” is a proposition. Deductive Reasoning You reason from generalizations to particulars. This type of reasoning is such that if the premises are true, the conclusion MUST BE true. 1. All men are mortal (generalization). 2. Socrates is a man. 3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal (particular). Inductive Reasoning You reason from particulars to generalizations. This type of reasoning only (at best) increases the probability of the conclusion*. 1. I have seen a bunch of white swans (a large set of particulars). 2. Therefore, all swans are white (generalization). *Sidenote: David Hume (the GOAT) argued that inductive inferences cannot be rationally justified, and that it ultimately rests on habit. But we (sadly, very sadly) do not get into that, because this is not a philosophy class. I lecture on this topic in Psych 405. Belief Bias Belief bias is a tendency to judge the logic of an argument based on whether you believe the conclusion (not on whether the logic is valid). E.g. is this deductive argument logically valid? 1. All bananas have pebbles inside them. 2. All pebbles are made of cheese. 3. Therefore, all bananas have cheese inside them. Well… it actually is logically valid! If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. But since we do not believe the conclusion, we mistakenly infer that the logic is invalid. Framing The same information can elicit different responses depending on how it is presented. E.g. if you say “there is a 97% chance you’ll survive the surgery”, you’re more likely to get people to agree to the surgery than if you say “there is a 3% chance you’ll die on the operating table”. Same information, different framing. Hypothetico-Deductive Reasoning This is a combination of creatively generating hypotheses (“hypothetico”) with deducing what the consequences of those hypotheses are (“deductive”), and then testing what follows from the hypotheses. If a consequence of the hypothesis is observed to be false, then we rule out that hypothesis. We keep doing this until we find a hypothesis that survives our attempt to disconfirm it. Hypothetico-Deductive Reasoning Example Hypothesis (H1): All university instructors are smart (this is a hypothesis you have, just a guess that you made up). If H1 is true, then my instructors this semester should be smart (that is deducing a prediction from your hypothesis). You then do some observations to see the prediction you deduced from your hypothesis is true. Unfortunately, you observe one of your instructors (David Simpson) is an idiot. So… the prediction you deduced from your hypothesis disagreed with observation. Therefore, your hypothesis has been disconfirmed. If your observations were consistent with your guess/hypothesis, then you would conclude that your hypothesis has not been disconfirmed (yet). Mental Set A mental set is a set of thinking strategies that have worked in the past. It is good to have a mental set, because it makes our thinking more efficient. However, it can also cause problems. Functional fixedness relates to mental set. It consists of focusing on the primary function of an object, and not thinking of other possible functions. E.g. if you’re too fixated on the fact that a paint can is normally used for holding paint, you might neglect the fact that it could be used for other things. Algorithms and Heuristics Algorithm: a slow, trial-and-error, step by step procedure that is guaranteed to get you the right answer. Heuristic: a mental shortcut that usually gives you the right answer, but sometimes make mistakes. Efficient, but imperfect. Evolution is cheap, so it made us rely a lot on heuristics (big brains are expensive, efficiency saves calories). Representativeness Heuristic Relying on stereotypes to judge probability (often while neglecting base rates). Suppose I randomly pick someone from the United States named Susan. She is shy, wears glasses, and likes books. Is it more likely that she’s a farmer or librarian? Most people say librarian because she fits the stereotype of a librarian. However, it is much more likely that she is a farmer, because the base rate of farmer is so much higher. There are WAY more farmers than librarians in the US. Even if a larger percentage of librarians are shy glasses- wearing book-lovers, there will still be way more farmers that are that type of person. But we don’t naturally think of base rates. We focus on the stereotype. Availability Heuristic When trying to decide how likely X is, we focus on how quickly and vividly something comes to mind. If it comes quickly to our mind, we conclude that it is more likely. E.g. after 9/11, a lot of people thought flying in a plane was very dangerous. They’d think to themselves “how likely am I do die in a plane crash”. A particular plane crash came to their mind very quickly (9/11). So, they conclude that it is very risky to fly on a plane. However, you are actually WAY more likely to die in a car than in a plane. Confirmation Bias The tendency to seek or interpret evidence in a way that favours your beliefs. This tendency can facilitate “belief perseverance”, which is the tendency to hold onto beliefs after they’ve been disproven. My Recent Paper on Confirmation Bias (Not Testable) I recently wrote a paper on confirmation bias, and submitted it for publication (I’m currently waiting to hear back from them). Participants had to read arguments for and against raising the minimum wage. I defined confirmation bias as “how much more convincing they found the arguments that confirmed their initial belief (compared to the arguments that disconfirmed their initial belief)”. I randomly assigned participants to two conditions. In the experimental condition, they were told that they would be regularly tested on the arguments to make sure they read them carefully. In the control condition, they weren’t tested on how carefully they read the arguments. My Recent Paper on Confirmation Bias (Not Testable) Participants in the experimental condition found the belief-confirming arguments less convincing. However, being in the experimental condition did NOT affect how convincing they found the belief-disconfirming arguments. This is consistent with other studies finding that confirmation bias works like this: when you see evidence that supports what you believe, you take it at face value and don’t think critically about it. When you see evidence that contradicts what you believe, you try to find problems with it. I think it is fine to try and find problems with belief-disconfirming evidence. We should just try to do the same for belief-confirming evidence… Creativity Creativity is usually defined by psychologists as consisting of two things: ○ Originality: the ideas should be rare/unusual ○ Appropriateness: the ideas should be appropriate/useful One measure of creativity is the question “how many uses can you think of for a brick”. In order to be creative, you can’t give the same answers everyone else does. Your answers should be rare. However, they have to also be good answers. Some answers might be rare because they’re dumb answers. One concept that relates to creativity is divergent thinking, where your thinking goes in multiple novel directions (as opposed to convergent thinking, where you’re aiming at one correct answer). Expertise and Schemas Expertise: extensive knowledge and experience with a subject. Schema: a concept you have in your head that allows you to form expectations and organize incoming information. E.g. when I look at this image, I know right away what it is (because I know Brazilian jiu-jitsu). It is the kimura from guard The fact that I have a schema for “kimura from guard” allows me to understand this image and easily remember it. Wisdom The book lists 5 components of wisdom: 1. Rich factual knowledge about life 2. Rich procedural knowledge about life 3. An understanding of lifespan contexts 4. An awareness of the relativism of values and priorities 5. The ability to recognize and manage uncertainty Mental Imagery and Mental Rotation The amount of time it takes to mentally rotate a shape correlates almost perfectly with how much rotation you have to do. Many cognitive psychologists interpret this to mean that you are mentally rotating representations of images in your head. Metacognition Meta means “over and above” or “about”. Metacognition means thinking about thinking. Humans can do more than just think: we can think about our thinking. We can consider whether our ways of thinking are the best ways of thinking, and adjust them. A species without metacognition (e.g. a dog) can (in a certain sense) think, decide, and react. But it cannot think about whether there is a better way of thinking. Its thinking patterns are just given to it by instinct and conditioning. Chapter 10 Intelligence Defining Ordinary Language Terms According to the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, the meaning of a word (in ordinary language) is determined by how the word is customarily used. Meaning is use. In ordinary language, words do not have clean one-sentence definitions. They have clusters of related meanings. Think of the word “game”. Is there one feature that unites all games (and excludes all non-games)? No. There is a cluster of things that we customarily call “games”. Think about family resemblance as an analogy. When you look at your family, you might have your dad’s nose, your brother might have your dad’s eye color, etc. There is not necessarily one feature that makes you all similar. But you are all still part of the same family. Words are like that, they pick out clusters of things. Defining Technical Terms In science, we often terms from ordinary language and give them more precise meanings (because this makes the terms more useful to us). For example, term “temperature” has different related meanings in ordinary language (e.g. when two people are fighting, we might say something metaphorical like “temperatures ran high”, meaning the confrontation was intense). But in science, temperature has a precise theoretical definition. It means the mean kinetic energy of the molecules (roughly, how fast are the molecules vibrating). Definition of Intelligence Defining “intelligence” is difficult. In ordinary language, the meaning of “intelligence” is a little bit vague. It means different things in different contexts. Psychologists often use “intelligence” interchangeably with “cognitive ability” or how good you are at solving cognitively difficult problems. The book defines “intelligence” as consisting of the ability to: Acquire knowledge Think and reason effectively Deal adaptively with the environment Caveat When we put forward a scientific/technical definition of something, we’re just making the definition up. Definitions are not “right” or “wrong”, they’re made up. However, some definitions are more useful than others. In my view, there are at least 3 things that make a scientific definition more or less useful (next slide). Good Features for a Scientific Definition to Have 1. Precision: we want the definition to be precise. The definitions of intelligence that psychologists have put forward are not as precise as the definitions of theoretical terms in sciences like physics. 2. Usefulness: we want the definition to be useful. That is, we want the definition to be part of a theory that explains lots of data, makes predictions, etc. Physicists decided to define “temperature” as “molecular motion”, and this definition has proved extremely useful. 3. Finally, we want the definition to conserve some of what we mean in ordinary language. If we defined intelligence as “how often you watch cartoons”, that would be precise (and would be useful for generating predictions), but it seems completely unrelated to what we ordinarily mean by “intelligence”. Francis Galton Francis Galton was Charles Darwin’s cousin. He invented the ideas of correlation, regression, and the nature-nurture debate. He was one of the first people to study intelligence. He measured things like reaction speed, skull size, etc. He was firmly on the “nature” side. He was a bit of an unsavoury character, he was the father of the eugenics movement. Alfred Binet’s Tests Binet developed some of the earliest intelligence tests. He developed them for French school children to determine which kids needed extra help. He put forward the idea of “mental age”, which is the age at which a child performs (e.g. if you score as well as the average 8 year old, then your mental age is 8, regardless of what you actual age is). William Stern Puts the Q in IQ William Stern took Alfred Binet’s idea of “mental age” and used it to develop the first definition of IQ (“intelligence quotient”). He defined IQ as the following equation (note that it has a quotient, or result of division, inside it) (Mental age / chronological age) X 100 E.g. Sally is 10 years old, so his chronological age is 10. But she scores as well as the average 12 year old. So her mental age is 12. Her IQ would be (12 / 10) X 100 = 120. So, pretty smart. Louis Terman and the Stanford-Binet Louis Terman (who worked at Stanford) took Binet’s tests and developed the “Stanford-Binet” IQ test. This was widely used for a long time. Today, the most commonly used IQ test is the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), which we’ll discuss later. Charles Spearman and Factor Analysis Charles Spearman developed a technique called factor analysis. Factor analysis allows you to analyze how various items correlate together. You can use it to extract factors. Here is a toy example. Pretend I asked the following 4 questions: How much alcohol have you had in the last month? How many parties have you been to in the last month? How much marijuana have you had in the last month? How many black playing cards do you own? The first 3 variables would probably cluster together, and could be represented as corresponding to one factor. The last variable would probably not correlate with the other 3 at all. Charles Spearman- g and s Spearman applied factor analysis to mental tests. When you give people large batteries of mental tests (math problems, vocabulary, general knowledge, spatial problems), you find that they are all strongly positively correlated. You can extract one factor that explains a lot of the variance. Spearman called this the “g” factor, or “general intelligence”. However, you can also detect other factors that explain some of the variance. Spearman called these other factors “s” factors, or “specific abilities. Thurstone’s Primary Mental Abilities Memorize these Cattell- gc and gf Cattell distinguished between crystallized intelligence or gc (how much stuff you know), and fluid intelligence or gf (how good you are is at solving new problems). Sternberg’s 3 Intelligences Sternberg postulated that there are 3 types of intelligence: Analytic intelligence: academically oriented abilities. This is what standard IQ tests measure. Practical intelligence: skill at getting around in the world. Also known as “street smarts”. Creative intelligence: ability to put forward new ideas. Howard Gardner’s 8 Intelligences Linguistic intelligence: skill with language Logical-mathematical intelligence: skill with logic and math Visuospatial intelligence: skill with spatial tasks Musical intelligence: skill with music Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: skill with body/movement Inter-personal intelligence: skill with understanding others Intra-personal intelligence: skill with understanding oneself Naturalistic intelligence: skill with nature Emotional Intelligence Emotional intelligence is a cluster of abilities related to emotions. It includes the ability to understand other people’s emotions, understand your own emotions, and control your own emotions. One test that is associated with emotional intelligence is the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test”. Here is an example: Deviation IQ For most modern IQ tests, we do not use mental age and chronological age anymore. For most IQ tests (including the WAIS, which is on the next slide), this is the equation for deriving someone’s IQ score: Bob’s IQ = 100 + 15 X ((Bob’s Score – Average Score) / Standard Deviation) Let’s suppose the average score on an IQ test is 42/68, and that the standard deviation is 4. If Bob got 50/68, his IQ would be: 100 + 15 X ((50 – 42) / 4) = 130 Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) This is the commonly used IQ test today. The VCI and WMI (the two on the left) are sometimes called “verbal IQ” The PRI and PSI (the two on the right) are sometimes called “performance IQ” Similarities Examples Part of the VCI- verbal comprehension index. What do an hour and a year have in common? What do a fish and a crow have in common? What do a poem and a statue have in common? Digit Span Examples Part of the WMI- working memory index. Repeat the following digits after me (the test giver will say them out loud) 4826 95071 59128 302946 6147182 38721534 014645738 Matrix Reasoning Example Part of the PRI- perceptual reasoning index scale. Symbol Search Example Part of the PSI- processing speed index scale. Achievement vs Aptitude Tests Achievement tests: how much have you learned (sort of similar to the idea of crystallized intelligence). Aptitude tests: how good are you at learning stuff (sort of similar to the idea of fluid intelligence). Most tests you take in class are achievement tests. IQ tests are intended to be aptitude tests. Reliability and Validity Reliability: does a test/measurement yield consistent results. E.g. if I give an IQ test to Susan on Monday and she gets an IQ score of 143, but she gets an IQ score of 71 on Friday, that would indicate LOW reliability. Validity: does a test/measurement measure what it is supposed to measure. E.g. does an IQ test measure intelligence or not. NOTE: a test can be reliable and NOT valid. If I measure your pinkie toe length to estimate your intelligence, that would be an extremely reliable test (it would give me the same score every time). But it would NOT be valid (it is not measuring intelligence). Ideally, we want our psychological measurements to have BOTH reliability and validity. Types of Reliability Test-retest reliability: does a test-taker obtain a similar score when they retake the test? The test-retest reliability of adult IQ scores is about 0.95 (if you do the retest after 2-12 weeks). Even if the gap is many years (e.g. from age 11 to age 80), the correlation is still high (0.66). IQ is probably the most reliable measure we have in psychology. Internal reliability: do items in the test correlate with each other? Interjudge reliability: do different test-givers obtain similar scores when they administer tests to the same people? Types of Validity Face validity (not in the book): prima facie (at first glance), does the test subjectively look like it is measuring the right thing? Measuring your pinkie toe length would have very low face validity as an IQ test. Construct validity: To what extent is the test actually measuring the construct of interest (e.g., intelligence)? As an analogy: one might ask whether a thermometer is measuring the right theoretical construct, namely, temperature (which is defined by a theory as molecular motion). Some psychologists criticize this idea and say that it is too theoretical. Content validity: Do the questions or test items relate to all aspects of the construct being measured? E.g. in order for the final exam to have content validity, it should have questions on all the chapters, not just some. Types of Validity (continued) Criterion validity: does the test correlate with something in the real world that it should correlate with. E.g. if the IQ test is really a good measure of intelligence, it should correlate with your grades. There are two types of criterion validity: concurrent validity, and predictive validity. The only difference is that concurrent validity is about whether the test correlates with something in the present, and predictive validity is about whether the test correlates with something in the future. Criterion Validity of IQ IQ positively correlates with high school grades (the correlation is around 0.6) and with income (the correlation is around 0.3, see the scatterplot). Correlations of 0.3-0.6 are pretty good for psychology. However… it leaves a lot unexplained, just look at the scatterplots: IQ Standardization IQ scores roughly follow a normal distribution or “bell curve” (see image below). Most people are close to the average. IQ tests are re-normed every few years such that 100 is the average, and 15 is the standard deviation. A standard deviation is (roughly) how far away on average people are from the average (that’s not technically right, but it is good enough for an intro class). Flynn Effect The philosopher James Flynn discovered that IQ scores have been increasing for around 100 years. For a long time no one noticed, because the tests get regularly changed such that 100 is the average score. The total increase has been around 30 points, or about 3 points per decade. We know that this cannot be due to genetic changes (evolution takes way longer), it must be due to something in the environment (better schooling, better nutrition, cultural changes, etc). Flynn Effect (continued) Different subtests have changed to different degrees. Below is an graph of the Flynn effect (for the years 1947-2002). Note that the Raven’s progressive matrices (there’s an example on the bottom left) has increased the most, whereas information, arithmetic, and vocabulary have increased the least. Static vs Dynamic Testing Static testing: keeping the stimuli on the test constant for everyone who takes it. Most tests you’ve taken are static tests. Dynamic testing: a more interactive type of testing where the test-giver provides feedback and measures how the test-taker uses the feedback. Neural Correlates of Intelligence Brain size is moderately correlated with IQ scores, around 0.35 to 0.45. Brain size is more strongly correlated with the g factor, around 0.6. Paradoxically, males have larger brains (even when controlling for body size), even though females (as we will see later) have the same average IQ as males (100). This might be explained by the fact that females have more white matter (more connections between brain regions). There is evidence that IQ is also correlated with measures of how quickly and efficiently neural activity is initiated by stimuli. The idea that IQ relates to “neural efficiency” goes back to Francis Galton. 3 Contributions to Human Differences 1. Genetics/Heritability: our DNA. One way to measure the contribution of genes- how similar are identical twins raised apart (they share none of their environment, but all their genes). 2. Shared Environment: the environment that is shared by siblings. One way to measure the contribution of the shared environment- how similar are adoptive siblings (they share the shared environment, but none of their genes). 3. Non-Shared Environment: the environment that is NOT shared by siblings (it is unique to the individual). Easy way to measure the contribution of the shared environment- how different are identical twins raised together (they shared all of their genes AND all of their shared environment). Behavior Genetics Techniques Adoption studies. Look at adopted children. Are they more similar to their biological parents, or to their adoptive parents? Adoptive siblings studies. Look at how similar adoptive siblings are. Twin studies. Look at monozygotic (identical) twins. Are they more similar than dizygotic (fraternal) twins? Separated twins studies. Look at how similar identical twins separated at birth are. Heritability of IQ Scores Identical twins raised in separate families have very similar IQ scores. Identical twins raised together have a higher correlation for IQ than fraternal twins raised together. The heritability of IQ is higher than it is for most psychological traits, with estimates ranging from 50-70% Note: one reason for the range of estimates is that heritability increases with age. In adulthood, the heritability of IQ is actually as high as 80%. 2 Important Caveats About Heritability 1. Heritability is about how much genetics explains VARIATION in a trait. It is not about how much genetics determine the trait. E.g. it makes no sense to say 90% of MY HEIGHT is due to genetics. We’re asking about what percentage of the DIFFERENCES in height are due to genetics. 2. Heritability can change depending on the environment. E.g. in poorer countries, or poorer socio-economic conditions, heritability estimates will be lower (because people aren’t reaching their genetic potential). Ethnic Group Differences in IQ Scores There are average differences between ethnic groups in IQ scores. In US samples, the average IQ for African Americans today is close to 90 (it used to be around 85), the average for European Americans is around 100, and the average for Asian Americans is around 105. The book does not mention this, but some studies find that the average IQ for Jewish Americans is even higher (estimates range from 107-115). As I will repeat later, these differences are only on average. Look at the image, that is roughly what these average differences look like. There is lots of overlap. Predictive Bias vs Outcome Bias Predictive bias: a test underpredicts the performance of one group. E.g. African Americans score lower than European Americans on IQ tests. If African Americans and European Americans got equally good college grades (something IQ tests are supposed to predict), that would mean that IQ tests are predictively biased. However, the evidence suggests that the tests are not biased in this way. Oucome bias: a test underestimates someone’s true mental ability. This can emerge if people grow up in an intellectually disadvantaged environment (poor schooling, poor nutrition, etc.) There is evidence that IQ tests are biased in this way. E.g. African Americans have various environmental disadvantages, and so they might not reach their full intellectual potential. History of the Controversy There is no disagreement about whether these differences exist. However, there is a history of debate about what causes these differences. The book mentions that in 1994, a book called “The Bell Curve” was released. The authors argued that some portion of ethnic group differences are due to genetics. However, the book doesn’t mention that the APA (American Psychological Association) published a response to the Bell Curve called “Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns”. This was written by a group of experts. They agreed that IQ is a valid measure, and that it is partly heritable. However, they argued that the evidence is against the idea that ethnic group differences are heritable. Ethnic Group Differences: 4 Things We Know 1. These differences are only ON AVERAGE. Every group will have very high IQ individuals and very low IQ individuals. 2. Heritability WITHIN groups does not imply that there is heritability BETWEEN groups. This is a very important concept, I’ll say more on the next slide. 3. We know that environmental factors CAN cause differences as large as the ethnic differences. Remember the Flynn effect, wherein average IQ has gone up by 30 points in about 100 years. That is all environmental. 4. Genetic differences between groups tend to be very small (around 10% of human genetic variation is variation between continental groups). Point 2 Example Imagine I took a handful of seeds and split them into two groups. I put Group A in bad soil, and I put Group B in good soil. WITHIN each group, differences in height would be due to genes. However, the fact that plants in Group A are shorter (on average) than plants in Group B is due to the environment (the bad soil). This example illustrates that heritability WITHIN groups (which we demonstrate in psychology by using twin studies) does NOT show that there is heritability BETWEEN groups. Sex Differences in IQ Subtests and Other Abilities The average IQ is the same for men and women (100 for each). However, there are differences in subtests (the differences cancel out overall). Men are better (on average) at: mental rotation, spatial navigation, mathematical reasoning (e.g. mathematical word problems), and throwing. Women are better (on average) at: object location memory, mathematical calculation, perceptual speed, verbal fluency, and fine-motor dexterity. Evolutionary psychologists conjecture that some of these differences are due to the fact that men were hunters and women were gatherers in our evolutionary past. This is difficult to test. There is some evidence that socialization plays a role in these differences. There is also evidence that hormones might play a role. Sex Differences in IQ Variability Even though the average IQ is the same for males and females, the male IQ distribution is more variable. There are more males with very high IQs and very low IQs. Intellectual Giftedness Around 2% of the population has an IQ of over 130. This is usually defined as the cutoff for being intellectually gifted. For some reason, the book says 10% of the population falls into this category. This is categorically FALSE, the authors made a mistake. This is a good reminder to not take anything the book says (or anything I say) on faith. Intellectual Disability Around 2% of the population has an IQ of under 70. In order to be diagnosed with an intellectual disability, a person has to have both an IQ of under 70 and difficulty functioning in everyday life. This can have different causes. Sometimes it is caused by Down syndrome, which is having an extra 21st chromosome. The average IQ of people with Down syndrome is around 50, but it is possible (albeit rare) to have Down syndrome and have a high IQ. Low IQ can also be caused by accidents or diseases during pregnancy or birth. And of course, it can be caused if the mother drinks alcohol during the pregnancy. Types of Intellectual Disability People with a mild intellectual disability tend to have siblings with low IQs as well. Like most IQ variation, it seems to be partly heritable. However, people with a profound intellectual disability tend to have siblings with average IQs. It seems to be more likely to be due to a random event (disease, brain injury, mutation, etc.)  Chapter 12 Development over the Lifespan Developmental Research Designs There are different methods for studying development. Suppose my hypothesis is that from age 20 to age 80, people like slower music because their brains slow down. Cross-sectional design: this is the easyist and cheapest method. You would just get a group of 20 year olds, a group of 30 year olds, etc. and a group of 80 year olds. You would then compare how much the different groups like slow music. There is a big problem with this method: the older people also grew up in a different generation. This means the differences could be due to 1) age or 2) cohort effects (which generation they grew up in). Developmental Research Designs (continued) Longitudinal design: get a group of 20 year olds and do followup studies with them until they’re 80. This is more valid than the cross-sectional design, but it is a pain in the butt to do. Sometimes the researcher dies or retires and you need to get a new one. Sequential design: get a group of 20 year olds, a group of 30 year olds and a group of 40 year olds. Follow all of those groups until they’re 80. Basically, do multiple longitudinal designs. Prenatal Development Germinal stage: sperm fertilizes the egg, creating a zygote. This stage lasts from conception to 14 days. This stage ends around the end of the second week, when the organism attaches itself to the mother’s uterus. Embryonic stage: 2nd-8th week. Various life support systems develop, as well as early versions of various organs. Fetal stage: 9th week to birth. The eyes open around 24 weeks, and around 28 weeks the fetus enters the “age of viability”, which means it is likely to survive outside the womb if born prematurely. Sex Determination Females have XX chromosomes (X from mom, X from dad), males have XY chromosomes (X from mom, Y from dad). In the absence of prenatal testosterone, the fetal body develops a female body. The Y chromosome contains a gene called the TDF (testis determining factor) gene. It causes testosterone to be secreted, which masculinizes the fetal body. Teratogens A teratogen is any environmental agent that harms prenatal development. These can include diseases the mother has (like syphilis, HIV), maternal stress, lead, radiation, and of course, alcohol. Alcohol can lead to a specific profile of physical deficits (including brain abnormalities), called “fetal alcohol syndrome”. Preferential Looking Procedure One method for studying baby cognition is measuring how long they look at different things. For example, babies have an early preference for face-like images (see graph). This method has also been used to study what beliefs babies have. This method relies on the assumption that babies look longer when they are surprised. E.g. babies look longer when objects float than when they fall to the ground. Piaget’s Theory Piaget was an early cognitive developmental theorist. He believed that babies come into the world as little scientists, testing out ideas about how the world works (their “inner scientist” is fully realized in the final formal stage, where they can use logic and test ideas more rigorously). Schema creation: when a kid’s brain forms a new concept (e.g. “dog”) Assimilation: when a kid’s brain adds a new thing to an existing concept (e.g. that golden retriever can be added to the concept “dog”) Accommodation: same as assimilation, but the concept must be changed in order to let in the new thing fit into the existing concept (e.g. a chihuahua is a dog? Hmmm… gonna have to change my concept of dog to let that in). Sensorimotor Stage (0-2) Kids primarily interact with the world with their sense and motor movement. Partway through (around 8 months), they develop a sense of “object permanence”, which is the understanding that objects continue to exist even when you cannot see them. According to Piaget, the lack of object permanence is what makes “peek-a- boo” funny to young babies: they think you’re coming back into existence. Preoperational Stage (2-7) Early language capacities (and the attendant more complex thinking) marks the beginning of this stage. Early in this stage, kids lack a “theory of mind”, they don’t understand that other people have different beliefs and emotions than they do. Theory of mind capacities emerge around age 3 or 4. For children with autism, they struggle much more with theory of mind related tasks. Kids in the preoperational stage do not understand conservation (see next slide). Concrete Operational Stage (8-12) Conservation refers to the understanding that amount stays the same even if shape or distribution changes. Coming to understand conservation marks the beginning of the concrete operational stage (they do not make the mistakes you see in the picture). Formal Operational Stage (12+) During this stage, kids fully realize their inner scientist. They can use hypothetico-deductive thinking: make up a guess/hypothesis, and test it to see if it is true. Criticism of Piaget There are three things that critics argued Piaget underestimated: ○ Variability between cultures- kids in preliterate cultures probably do not achieve the formal operational stage, because they are not exposed to that way of thinking ○ Variability between individuals- kids vary widely in terms of when they reach various stages ○ The cognitive abilities of babies in the so-called “sensorimotor stage”- experiments using the preferential looking procedure indicate that babies understand things like object permanence sooner than Piaget thought Information Processing Approaches Defenders of these approaches argue that Piaget overemphasized “stages”, and that learning/development should be thought of as a continuous process. Lev Vygotsky Lev Vygotsky was another developmental psychologist who emphasized cognitive development. The set of tasks that a kid could either just barely do alone, or do with help, Vygotsky called the kid’s “zone of proximal development”. He argued that kids needed “scaffolds” or adult help to learn new skills and advance to new zones of development. Temperament Inborn emotional and behavioral tendency. Some babies have an “easy” temperament, wherein they are relaxed and have positive affect. Other babies have a “difficult” temperament, wherein they are more easily agitate. I have 3 younger siblings, and my mom always says that each of us were born with very different temperaments. Erikson’s Stages Trust vs mistrust (0-1): crying, breastfeeding, etc. Can I trust the world to respond to my needs? Autonomy vs shame and doubt (1-2): potty training. Can I be a self-controlled individual, or do I develop improperly and become ashamed? Initiative vs guilt (3-5): early exploring. Can I be curious and take initiative, or is my curiosity crushed? Industry vs inferiority (6-12): schooling and sports. Can I become competent, or do I suck at stuff? Erikson’s Stages (continued) Identity vs role confusion (12-20): who am I? Will I develop a clear identity, or will I be unsure about who I am? Intimacy vs isolation (20-40): can I become close to people? Will I have fulfilling romantic relationships and friendships, or will I be alone? Generativity vs stagnation (40-65): can I be productive? Am I a productive member of my community/family, or do I stay unsuccessful? Integrity vs despair (65-death): how satisfied am I with my life? Do I look back and feel proud and accomplished, or do I look back and feel regret? Imprinting Some animals are preprogrammed to become attached to whatever they see the most of during their critical period. This process is called imprinting. Basically, whatever the baby animal sees the most of, it thinks that is its parent. Konrad Lorenz did this with baby geese. This is very cute. However, it is less cute when you remember that Lorenz was a hardcore member of the Nazi Party (sorry to ruin it). Harry Harlow Harlow separated baby monkeys from their mothers and put them in an apparatus with two fake mothers. One was a cold metal thing with milk. The other was a soft cuddly thing. The babies preferred the soft cuddly one. This was evidence of the importance of contact comfort for attachment. Mary Ainsworth’s Strange Situation and Attachment Ainsworth had a room that mothers would take their babies into. The mother would leave for a minute and come back. Secure attachment: the baby cries when the mother leaves, but is comforted when she returns. Resistant attachment: the baby cries a lot when the mother leaves, but is not comforted when she returns. Avoidant attachment: the baby does not care when the mother leaves, and does not care when she returns. Disoriented attachment: disorganized or contradictory reactions. Two-Dimensional Model of Attachment Style Building on Ainsworth’s ideas, current scales of attachment style (used for adults) have two dimensions: anxiety (how much do you worry about your relationships and/or lack of relationships), and avoidance (how much do you avoid being close to people). This leads to 4 different attachment styles: ○ Secure: low anxiety, low avoidance ○ Preoccupied: high anxiety, low avoidance ○ Dismissive: low anxiety, high avoidance ○ Fearful: high anxiety, high avoidance Two-Dimensional Model of Attachment Style Secure attachment: corresponds to secure attachment in Ainsworth’s model. Associated with well-being and healthy relationships. Preoccupied attachment: corresponds roughly to resistant attachment in Ainsworth’s model. Dismissive attachment: corresponds roughly to avoidant attachment in Ainsworth’s model. There is some evidence that this attachment style is a suppressive defence mechanism. Fearful attachment: corresponds roughly to disoriented attachment. Parenting Styles Memorize these: Moral Psychology vs Moral Philosophy Moral philosophy: answers conceptual questions about morality. ○ What do moral statements mean? ○ What are the right answers to moral questions? ○ Are there right answers to moral questions? Moral psychology: answers empirical questions about morality. ○ How do people think about moral questions? ○ What psychological/neurological factors cause our moral judgments? ○ Can we predict what judgments people will make? Moral Development- Kohlberg Kohlberg gave moral dilemmas to young boys and found that they progressed in a predictable way. Memorize these stages: Critics of Kohlberg One famous critic of Kohlberg is Carol Gilligan. She pointed out that Kohlberg’s samples were all male. She did some studies seeming to show that girls were less likely to end up with the idea that abstract moral principles are what matter most. She argued that girls are more likely to emphasize contextual and relational variables, not abstract notions like “justice”. Gilligan’s studies have generally not replicated very well, but she was right to ask the question “is there a sex difference” Others have argued that Kohlberg’s model has a Western cultural bias. Dual-Process Model of Moral Psychology (Not Testable) One area of moral psychology that I have worked in is other-sacrificial dilemmas, which involve deciding whether it is right to harm or kill one person to save many (see picture). There is a lot of evidence that people who rely more on cognitive reflection (slow, careful thinking) are more likely to approve of sacrificing someone else if it is for the greater good. My Dissertation Topic (Not Testable) I have done a set of experiments to see if cognitive reflection (slow, careful thinking) is correlated not just with a willingness to sacrifice someone else for the greater good, but also with a willingness to sacrifice oneself for the greater good. Decisions made on behalf of maximizing the greatest happiness for the greater good are called “utilitarian” decisions. I used a statistical technique called process dissociation (which I won’t get into) to distinguish self-sacrificial utilitarian tendencies from purely altruistic tendencies. Spoiler: my studies indicate that performance on the cognitive reflection test is positively correlated with self-sacrificial utilitarian tendencies. Adolescence Terms Puberty: bodily changes initiated by the hypothalamus telling the pituitary gland to secrete hormones. Primary sex characteristics: physical characteristics that directly relate to reproduction (sex organs). Secondary sex characteristics: physical characteristics that differ between boys and girls, but that are not directly related to reproduction (e.g. breasts in girls and muscle mass in boys). Adolescent Egocentrism Adolescent egocentrism consists of believing that you are unique and important and that everyone is watching you. Personal fable: overestimating how unique your experiences are (e.g. of intense love). Imaginary audience: overestimating how many people are watching you. Intelligence and Age There is some conflicting results on this point (depending on what method you use, and which type of test you use), but in general: Crystallized intelligence stays the same or maybe goes up after the 20s. Fluid intelligence and processing speed tend to go down after the 20s. Marriage, Family, Cohabitation Marriage satisfaction is a U curve: highest around the time the first kid is born, goes down after that, goes up after the “empty nest”. Cohabitation: living together without being married. Mid-life Crisis This is an idea in the public imagination according to which people have a large increase in stress about the meaning of their life and how little success they’ve had. Large studies tend to not find evidence of this. A study of 10,000 people found that neuroticism (negative emotion) stays constant in that period. Death, Dying, and Grief Elisabeth Kübler-Ross put forward an influential theory about the process of accepting one’s death. It has been applied to grief outside of that context. The theory posits 5 stages of grief: 1. Denial: not accepting the truth 2. Anger: being mad about the truth 3. Bargaining: trying to change the truth 4. Depression: grieving/being sad about the truth 5. Acceptance: having peace with the truth This theory remains controversial.  Chapter 13 Behavior in a Social Context Attributions Attributions are explanations we give of people’s behavior (including our own). These are not scientific explanations, just ones that we intuitively give in everyday life. Personal/internal attributions: Susan did X because of a trait she has. Situational/external attributions: Susan did X because of the situation. There are 3 factors we take into account when deciding whether to make a personal or situational attribution: Consistency: how often does Susan behave in X way in Y situation? Distinctiveness: to what extent does Susan behave in X way ONLY in Y situation? Consensus: how much does everyone else do X in Y situation? Fundamental Attribution Error The fundamental attribution error is the tendency to make PERSONAL/INTERNAL attributions for the behavior of others (whether the behavior is good or bad). E.g. if Bob does bad on a test, you’ll tend to say “that’s because Bob is an idiot”, NOT “Bob probably had a bad sleep”. If Makayla does well on a test, you’ll tend to say “that’s because Makayla is a genius!” Self-Serving Bias A tendency to make personal attributions for one’s successes (I got an A in economics because I’m smart), and to make situational attributions for one’s failures (I got a D in English because the class was too hard). We do an attenuated version of this for our friends. Culture and Attribution For a long time, the fundamental attribution error and the self-serving bias were thought to be universal. However, recent studies indicate that these tendencies either only exist in individualistic cultures, or they exist to a much larger degree in individualistic cultures (compared to collectivistic cultures). Primacy and Recency Effects In memory research, it was discovered that information received at the beginning and at the end of a list is remembered better. This applies to social judgments. Yes, first impressions do shape how people view you later on (due to the primacy effect, wherein information learned earlier has more influence), and the most recent think someone has done also exerts an influence (due to the recency effect, wherein information that was learned most recently has more influence). Self-Fulfilling Prophecy 3 steps: 1. You have a belief (e.g. “Frederick is a jerk”). 2. You behave differently based on that belief (you are unfriendly to Frederick). 3. Your behaviour causes your belief to become true (because of your behaviour, Frederick responds by being a jerk). Cognitive Dissonance Again, 3 components 1. There is a contradiction between your beliefs and your behaviour (sometimes between two behaviours). E.g. Bob says hi to you, and you say “Hi Bob, nice to see you”. However, you believe that Bob is an idiot and you hate him. 2. You notice the contradiction, and it is unpleasant (this is the “dissonance”). You feel disgusted that you were so nice to Bob. 3. You become motivated to resolve the contradiction. This may cause you to think “maybe I don’t hate Bob so much”, or it may cause you to say “just kidding Bob, it is not nice to see you. You suck”. Festinger’s Study This study was done in the 1950s, so I’ve changed the numbers to control for inflation. I’m also ignoring one condition to simplify. Two groups get paid to tell someone that a boring task was fun. One group gets paid 10 bucks to say “that was fun”, the other group gets paid 200 bucks to say “that was fun”. After they’ve told someone “that task was fun”, they are asked “how fun was it actually”? The group that got paid LESS (10$) says that it is more fun. Festinger’s explanation was that they experienced cognitive dissonance. They believe that they are good people who would not lie for such a small amount, but they just said that this boring task was fun for 10$... so they tell themselves “I actually did have fun!” Persuasion Central route to persuasion: using logic and arguments and evidence to convince someone. Peripheral route to persuasion: all other variables that influence persuasion (e.g. we believe people more when they’re funny, attractive, or when they appeal to our emotions). Social Facilitation Dominant response: the response we are more likely to make. If we are new to a task, or it is hard, the dominant response is to make mistakes. If we have practiced a task, or it is easy, the dominant response is to succeed. Social facilitation: when people watch you, your dominant response is increased. In other words, if you’re doing something hard, being watched makes you do even worse. If you’re doing something easy, being watched makes you do even better. This pattern is even observed in other animals. Zimbardo Stanford Prison Study Philip Zimbardo set up a fake prison in the basement of Stanford University, and randomly assigned participants to be guards or prisoners. The guards treated the prisoners like dirt. Zimbardo presented this as evidence that social situations and social roles strongly influence our behavior. In class, I will go on a rant about why this study is a fraud. Zimbardo TOLD THE GUARDS to be jerks. It was NOT the “role” that made them aggressive. But… for the test, you should know that Zimbardo CLAIMED that his study demonstrated the importance of social roles. Asch Study- Social Influence Asch presented groups of people with images like this. He would ask them “which is the same as the target line: A, B, or C?” Obviously, the right answer is C. If you don’t agree… go see a doctor. But here’s the twist. The first few people in the group who answer the question are “confederates” (people secretly working with the experimenter), and they all say “A”. The real participant goes along with the group around 35% of the time if they’re with four or five confederates Types of Social Influence Informational social influence: following the group because you believe they have accurate knowledge. You believe you’re getting genuine information from them. Normative social influence: following the group to be accepted, or going along with the “norm”. Milgram Obedience Study Stanley Milgram was a Jewish psychologist who was interested in how the Germans were capable of committing such unspeakable crimes during the holocaust. He wondered if obedience to authority was an important variable. Participants were paired with a confederate (but as always, they think it’s a real participant), and are given the job of teaching the confederate a series of word pairs. They have an electric shock panel which allows them to deliver shocks to the confederate whenever they got an answer wrong. The shocks ranged from 15 volts to 450 volts (see next slide). Milgram would be in the room telling the participant “you must continue, you must electrocute them”, even though the confederate is screaming, and eventually goes unconscious. Milgram Obedience Study (continued) 65% of participants went all the way to 450 volts, which meant they kept electrocuting someone AFTER they seemed unconscious, just because some dude in a white lab coat told them to! Salesperson Techniques Norm of reciprocity: when someone does something nice to you, you feel obligated to reciprocate (do something nice back). This is why business sometimes give free things. Door-in-the-face technique: start big (which they’ll definitely say no to), then go medium (it seems small in comparison). Foot-in-the-door technique: start small (which they’ll probably say yes to), then go medium (they’re more likely to because they’ve already agreed to something else). Group Sources of Irrationality “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.” –Friedrich Nietzsche Deindividuation: when in a group, people lose their sense of individual responsibility and do foolish/uninhibited things. Social loafing: when in a group, people work less hard. Group polarization: when in a group that is like-minded, opinions become more extreme (in the direction that they already agree). Groupthink: under some conditions, groups will fail to think critically because dissenting opinions are repressed, and people want to agree. There are several historical examples of this leading to bad policy decisions. Variables that Increase Attraction Proximity: being physically near someone. This is partly driven by the mere exposure effect (the more you see something, the more you like it). Similarity: the idea that “opposites attract” is just wrong. Similarity predicts increased attraction. Physical Attractiveness While there is considerable variability between cultures in what is attractive (e.g. whether thinness is attractive differs between cultures) some things seem to be universal. The aspects of attractiveness that are universal seem to relate to health and fertility. Clear skin, clear teeth, youthful eyes, symmetrical face, shoulders that are wider than the waist (for males), and hips that are wider than the waist (for females). Interestingly, faces that are more “average” are more attractive, in the following sense: if you take a bunch of faces and average them together, the composite will be very attractive. This is because an average face looks healthier, it looks like it lacks harmful mutations or injuries. Theories of Sex Differences There are sex differences in sexual preferences. Males cross-culturally care more about physical attractiveness than females do, and females care more about their mate’s resources than males do. Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary theory according to which sex differences in sexual preferences emerged from different evolutionary selection pressure. We discussed this in 104. Social structure theory: a sociological theory according to which those sex differences emerge because males have more societal privilege and resources. Females have to care more about their mate’s resources as a result. There is evidence that societies have smaller sex differences in sexual preferences when there is more equality between men and women. Sternberg’s Theory of Love Kinda interesting idea. I won’t test you on it, the next theory is better. Helen Fischer’s Theory of Love Helen Fischer’s theory is somewhat similar to Sternberg’s, but her account is based on a neuroscientific understanding of different brain systems. She posits 3 separate systems: Lust, which is aimed at having sex (doesn’t necessarily have to be aimed at one person). Associated with testosterone and estrogen. Romantic attraction, which is the obsessive infatuation with one person. She argues this is designed to get pair-bonding started. Associated with dopamine (and some other neurotransmitters). Attachment, which is the feeling of bonding and closeness. Associated with oxytocin. Transfer of Excitation- Bridge Study Transfer of excitation: arousal created by X can be transferred to be about Y. An attractive woman approaches men on a high bridge and a low bridge, and pretends to be doing a study about creative expression. It involves giving the man her number. On the high bridge (where the man’s heart rate goes up), the men are more likely to find the woman attractive and call her. The researchers interpreted this result as showing that when men’s heart rate is already up, and they see an attractive woman, they interpret that extra-fast heart rate as meaning they’re even more attracted to her. Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination Stereotypes: generalized BELIEFS about a group (e.g. Asians are good at math, African-Americans are violent). Prejudice: negative (emotionally valenced) ATTITUDE about a group (e.g. I dislike people from Bulgaria). Discrimination: unfair BEHAVIOUR directed at a group (e.g. I don’t hire Bulgarians). Implicit Association Test A widely used test designed to measure implicit or unconscious biases. People are generally faster (i.e. they click faster) when they have to associate black faces with negative words and white faces with positive words. There is controversy about how predictively valid these tests are. Ingroup/Outgroup Biases In-group favouritism: our group is awesome compared to them Out-group derogation: their group sucks compared to us Out-group homogeneity bias: “those people” are all the same Realistic Conflict Theory Realistic conflict theory posits: limited resources leads to ingroup competition. There is evidence that economic downturn leads to more prejudice. Robbers Cave Study Surprisingly, there is evidence that in some context, having a common threat or common project can DECREASE prejudice. Sherif did a famous study where he divided boys in a summer camp into two teams, Rattlers and Eagles. The two teams became bitterly divided and grew to hate each other. However, giving them tasks that involved a common threat and superordinate goals (goals they had to work together on) reduced inter-group hostility. Stereotype Threat Some studies find that if there are negative stereotypes (e.g. about their performance on math tests) about group X, members of group X will do worse on math tests after stating that they are members of group X. There is controversy about whether this result replicates. Models of Altruism Altruism: helping someone else without benefitting yourself. Empathy-altruism model: altruism is caused by empathy, the ability to understand/experience what someone else is experiencing. Negative state relief model: altruism is caused by internal distress caused by internal distress that occurs when we see someone suffer. We are therefore doing it to reduce our own distress. Explanations of the Bystander Effect Bystander effect: the more people are present for an emergency, the less likely it is that anyone will help. Diffusion of responsibility: everyone thinks “someone else will help”. Pluralistic ignorance: no one thinks it is safe, but everyone thinks that everyone else thinks it is safe. Just World Bias A bias towards thinking that people get what they deserve. This helps us feel safe (“that bad thing would never happen to me, I’m a good person”). This bias leads to victim-blaming. Biology of Aggression The hypothalamus is the boss of the hormone system, so it is involved. So is the amygdala, which is widely thought to be an emotion center in the brain. Low serotonin is associated with impulsive aggression (some have argued that low serotonin is associated with being low status, and therefore with being willing to take risks). High testosterone is associated with aggression aimed at dominating others. Psychology of Aggression- Media Violence Debate Two different theories lead to different predictions Catharsis theory (Freud): observing media violence should decrease aggression because they provide an outlet. Modeling/social learning: media violence will increase aggression because people imitate the behavior that they see others engaging in. Chapter 14 Personality Psychodynamic Perspective According to Freud, the mind consists of three main components: The id (in German, the “it”): this part develops first, it consists of raw animal desire, and is governed by the pleasure principle. The ego (in German, the “I”): this part develops next. It is the decider (to quote George Bush), and it is governed by the reality principle. The super-ego (the super-I): this part develops last (though never fully in women according to Freud, who was a huge sexist). It consists of our moral views that we are socialized to have. Defence Mechanisms Memorize these. Freud’s Stages of Development If you don’t go through a stage properly, you can develop a fixation. Oral fixation: obsession with mouth pleasure in adulthood (drinking, smoking) Anal retentive fixation: too controlling/organized in adulthood Anal expulsive fixation: too uncontrolled/disorganized in adulthood Neo-Freudians Erik Erikson: we already saw him in the development chapter (he modified Freud’s stages) Alfred Adler: he believed striving for superiority was a more central human motivation than sex (he developed the idea of compensation). Karen Horney: whereas Freud believed women had penis envy, Horney argued that men have womb envy. Carl Jung: argued for the existence of a collective unconscious, which includes various archetypes. Object relations theorists: our relationship with caregivers in childhood provide working models through which we interpret later social relationships. George Kelley Kelley is put in the humanistic section, but he rejected that label. I think it makes more sense to think of him as an early cognitive theorist (though he rejected that label too). The key feature of his theory is the idea of “personal constructs”, which are cognitive representations of the world (that are often binaries like good-bad) that influence people’s behavior. Carl Rogers We’re going to come back to Rogers in the final chapter, so we don’t need too much detail. The two circles are the self-concept (what you think you are like) and your experience. If they do not overlap, your self-concept (e.g. Julian thinks “I’m really good with women”) is incongruent with your experience (women keep rejecting Julian). Someone who is a fully functioning self has these two things integrated. Early Applications of Factor Analysis to Personality Hans Eysenck proposed a two-factor model of personality in which there are two basic dimensions: introversion-extroversion, and neuroticism-stability. Raymond Cattell proposed that there are 16 factors. Given how factor analysis works, it is a matter of choice how many factors to have. The more factors you have, the more variance you explain. However… you want the number of factors to be small enough that it the model is useful (you could have 100 factors, but that would be silly). Five Factor Model (The Big Five) or OCEAN Today, the most popular model based on factor analysis is the five factor model. Memorize these… they’re important (cough-cough). Openness to experience: people high in this trait are creative, interested in ideas and new experiences, and they are not conventional or conservative. Conscientiousness: people high in this trait are hard-working, detail-oriented, disciplined and orderly. Extraversion: people high in this trait are outgoing, social, and experience more positive emotion. Agreeableness: people high in this trait are compassionate, polite, and trusting. People low in this trait are… mean… Neuroticism: people high in this trait are sensitive to negative emotion and emotional instability. Under-arousal and Over-arousal Eysenck proposed that extroverts are under-aroused, and that they therefore constantly seek stimulation. By contrast, he proposed that introverts are over- aroused, and that they therefore seek to be alone and calm. Reciprocal Determinism Personality, behavior and the environment all influence each other. Locus of Control Julian Rotter put forward the idea of locus of control, which is essentially “what do you believe controls what happens to you”. Internal locus of control: you believe that YOU control what happens to you. External locus of control: you believe that something outside of you (the environment, fate, whatever) controls what happens to you. An idea that somewhat relates to locus of control is “self-efficacy” (from Albert Bandura), which is one’s belief in one’s own effectiveness. Walter Mischel Mischel argued that traits are not especially useful in predicting behavior. He thought that the situation was more important. He thought what we had were “if-then behaviour contingencies”, which means we will do different things in different situations. He’s also famous for developing the marshmallow test, a measure of self-control in children which predicts future behaviour. Rational Approach vs Empirical Approach Rational approach: make a test based on a theoretical understanding of what items relate to a trait. E.g. I have a theory that depression is about rumination, and so I ask “how much do you ruminate” as a way to measure depression. Empirical approach: make a test based on correlations, not based on a theory. E.g. suppose we observe on average depressed people read newspaper comics more. We include that as an item to measure depression, even if we do not have a theory about why that relates to depression. MMPI The MMPI falls squarely under the empirical approach. Projective Tests These tests involve the presentation of an ambiguous stimulus, and you have to interpret what it is. The idea is that you will have to project assumptions onto the stimulus, and what you tend to project onto the test tells us something about your unconscious tendencies. The two most popular projective tests are ○ Rorschach Inkblot Test ○ Thematic Apperception Test Rorschach Inkblot Test What do you see in this inkblot? According to defenders of projective tests, your answer says something about you. Thematic Apperception Test Tell a story about what just happened -> According to defenders of projective tests, your answer says something about you.  Chapter 15 Stress, Coping, and Health Stressors vs Stress A stressor is something in the event that causes stress, and the stress is the set of reactions we have to the stressor. Holmes-Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale This was an early scale which included any life change (good or bad) as having a certain number of life event change units. It was used to predict health breakdowns. Later research indicated that only bad life events predict health breakdowns. Primary vs Secondary Appraisal Primary appraisal: your cognitive evaluation of the situation (is it good or bad, etc) Secondary appraisal: do I have the ability to deal with this situation. General Adaptation Syndrome Memorize these steps -> Exhaustion is when you are most likely to get sick, because your body’s resources are depleted. Rape Trauma Syndrome A reaction wherein a victim of rape continually feels nervous, decreased enjoyment of sex. One study found that one quarter of women who were raped six years prior said that they had still not recovered psychologically. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder A disorder that is caused by a traumatic event (e.g. warfare, terrorist attack) As the book says, it includes severe anxiety, intrusive memories of the traumatic event, and other symptoms Residential School Syndrome One cluster of symptoms that is similar to PTSD is residential school syndrome. It is controversial whether this should be a separate diagnosis, but some argue that there is a somewhat unique profile of symptoms. Social Support We are a social species. Isolation is a predictor of all sorts of bad things, including bad health and early death. Conversely, social support is one of the most important protective factors against the negative effects of stress. Hardiness One researcher put forward the idea of hardiness, which she defined as consisting of “3 Cs” Commitment: dedication to their tasks Control: they feel like their actions make a difference Challenge: they view stressors as challenges/opportunities, they do not view them negatively. Other Protective Factors Coping self-efficacy: the belief in one’s own ability/effectiveness at dealing with stress. Optimism: a positive outlook. Lastly, finding meaning in the midst of suffering is important. Religion is one possible shortcut to being able to find meaning. Caveat: if you view stress as a punishment from God, that turns out to not so helpful. Type A Personality vs Type B Personality Type A: competitive, driven, hardworking, irritable. They get stuff done, but they’re at greater risk of cardiovascular disease. Type B: relaxed, easy-going, laid-back. They can be lazy, but they’re at lower risk of cardiovascular disease. Types of Coping Memorize these. Gender, Culture, and Coping Men are more likely to use problem-focused coping, women are more likely to used social support, and emotion-focused coping. People from individualistic cultures use more problem-focussed coping, collectivistic cultures (at least Asian and Hispanic ones) use more of the other two forms of coping. Transtheoretical Model Memorize these -> Aerobic Exercise and Dieting Aerobic exercise (cardio) is unsurprisingly associated with physical health and longevity. Different variables predict dropping out, including low self-efficacy and lack of social support. Healthy eating is also important for staying healthy. The book lists some evidence-based techniques. HIV, AIDS and Substance Abuse HIV (as most of you know) is a virus transmitted by sexual contact and/or by needles. The book reviews some prevention programs, including education about using protection. Substance use is something else that causes a lot of damage to people’s health. Alcohol abuse leads to many fatalities on the road, tobacco leads to lung cancer, and of course we’ve heard a lot about the toll of the opioid crisis. Multimodal Treatments Eclectic approach that combines multiple treatment techniques, including: Aversion therapy Mindfulness meditation Self-monitoring Coping skills Marital and family counselling Positive reinforcement Lapse and Relapse Let’s suppose Jonah is an alcoholic who has been clean for 10 years. Lapse: Jonah gets smashed one night. Relapse: Jonah goes back to drinking all the time. A lapse can often lead to a relapse due to the abstinence violation effect: people become hopeless after the lapse and lose confidence in their strength/ability to resist temptation. Harm Reduction Harm reduction is increasingly used for substance abuse. Practitioners of harm reduction do not aim to stop people from using drugs, but rather want to reduce the harm of using drugs. E.g. they will create safe injection sites where people are given clean needles etc. Positive Psychology Positive psychology focusses on happiness and flourishing. Instead of studying the ways we go wrong, they study the ways we go right. Hedonic happiness: total amount of pleasure. Philosophers like Epicurus (and the classical utilitarians) thought this was what mattered. Eudaimonic happiness: meaning/flourishing. Philosophers like Aristotle thou