What is Bennet-Levy and Marteau procedure?
-used 2 questions about 29 animals
-participants told that none of the animals were dangerous
QUESTIONNAIRE 1 - asked about fear of animals and how close the person would like to get to them (scale for fear: 1-3) (scale for closeness: 1-5)
QUESTIONNAIRE 2 - measure how the participants felt about each animal
they rated each species on a 3 point scale for:
ugliness
how steady they were
sliminess
how suddenly they move
how many people took part in the questionnaires for Bennett-levy and Marteau?
30 men and 34 women - 1
24 men and 25 women - 2
What is Bennet-Levy and Marteau findings?
- most feared = rats, cockroach, jelly fish, spider, slug
- least feared = robin, lamb, cat, ladybird, rabbbit
What is Bennet-Levy and Marteau aim?
to see whether we’re more afraid of, or avoid animals that:
- move quickly
- move suddenly
- look very different from people
what was Bennet-Let and Marteau conclusions?
- the features of ugliness,sliminess, speediness and sudden movement all make animals for frightening
- ugliness is judged by how different an animal if from a human
- the fear of certain animal supports the idea that preparedness relates to an animals features
what was Bennet-Let and Marteau strengths
- different participants answered the two questionaries which helped make sure they didn’t know what the aim was about
- men and women were used who have different phobias so the findings apply to both genders
- it was ethical because the participants Disney need to see the animals which would’ve frightened some of them
what was Bennet-Let and Marteau weaknesses?
- the instruction wasn’t very successful because the participants were told the animals weren’t dangerous but may still thought that rats were harmful
- the questionnaire only asked about six factors in the interviews
what was the Mineka et al study?
- they found that their laboratory monkeys that had grown up in the wild were afraid of snakes
- the ones born in captivity weren’t afraid of snakes
- they tested the idea that monkeys had late bed in the wild to be afraid of snakes by observing their reactions to snakes and other things
- the lab born monkeys then watched the wild born monkeys reaction to the objects and they became afraid of the snakes
- they thought that the wild born monkeys had learned their behaviour form observing adults
what is Coombes et al study?
- let two rats drink from same spout
- one rat had been given an injection to make it sick
- later both rats avoided drinking from the spout because it had seen the other rat being sick
- the tat that hadn’t been sick learned not to drink the water because it saw an unpleasant effect
Explain little Albert
before:
NS = white rat (no effect) > UCS = hearing a big clang from hammer and steel > UCR= fear
during:
NS= white rat + UCS = big clang from hammer and steel > UCR = fear
after:
CS = white rat > CR= fear
Ohman aim
the researchers waned to find out whether people were genetically developed to be afraid of situations/objects that could be potentially threatening
Ohman procedure
- participants were put into different groups
- one condition they warts given an electrical shock when looking at pictures of a house or flowers
- the other conditioned they were also given an electrical shock but they were shown pictures of snakes and spiders
- level of fear was measured by a galvanic skin response (GRS)
ohman findings
- both groups shower fear when they were shown pictures that they had experienced an electrical shock with
- the GCR was still higher for those when pictures were shown of spiders and snakes
ohman conclusion
they are more likely to develop some phobias than others which suggests that we may have developed to equine phobias to situations or objects that are threatening
Preparedness Theory:
Seligmal
- it says that we have developed phobias to objects or situations that are potentially threatening to us thousands of years ago
- those who developed a phobia today are those people who avoided those situations in hunter times
- so the behaviour to avoid objects or situations has evolved over time > passed on trough genetics
- it maintained that there was a biological preparedness - we aren’t born with phobias, we are born with the understanding of potentially harming objects which create a phobia
Heinrichs et al aim
they wanted to see if being brought up in different culture affected social anxiety and fear of blushing
Heinrichs et al design
- 909 university students that study psychology were tested
- from 8 different universities from 8 different countries (volunteers)
- they were divided into two groups:
collectivises and individualists cultures based on were they lived
Heinrichs et al two groups with countries
individualists:
- USA
- Australia
- Canada
- The Netherlands
- Germany
collectivists:
- Spain
- Korea
- Japan
Heinrichs et al procedure
- participants were given a short descriptions of a social situation and asked how they’d react
- participants were also asked to completed a social anxiety and blushing questionnaire
Heinrichs et al results
- collectivists cultures often respond in a way that showed a high anxiety
- they gave answers that avoided public interaction or speaking
- they were also more fearful of blushing and scored higher on the social anxiety question
Heinrichs et al order of highest anxiety to lowest
Japan Korea Spain USA Canada Australia The Netherlands Germany
Heinrichs et al conclusion
- collectivists culture show greater social anxiety and fear of blushing
- collectivists countries have strict rules about acceptable behaviour
- collectivists culture hold back through fear of letting the group down if they’re wrong
- social not as are more Important for collectivists culture as the behaviour of an individual affects the whole group
little Peter aim
to investigate whether a phobia in a little by could be deco distilled and where this would generalise to other objects
little Peter procedure
- he was 2 years and 10 months old
- she watched him playing with beads in his cot and an experimenter showed him a white rat
- he screamed
- he was moved away, leaving his heads behind
- when the rat touched the beads he protested but not when another child touched them
- the next day his reactions to different objects were observed, his fear of rats generalised to other objects
