Individual Differences Approach
Recap, assumptions and Evaluation
and exam practice
Sample Section C Questions
Outline one assumption of the individual differences
approach (2)
Describe how the individual differences approach could
explain multiple personality disorder. (4)
Describe one similarity and one difference between
any studies that take the individual differences
approach. (6)
Discuss strengths and weaknesses of the individual
differences approach using examples from any studies
that take this approach. (12)
Assumptions of the Individual
Differences Approach
1.
Assumes that while people have things in common there are
also differences between people. This approach focuses on
the way that people are different rather than the way they
are the same.
Difference in experience and genetics
2.
Therefore this approach assumes that we cannot make broad
generalisations about why people behave the way they do
because each person is unique.
Will differs in terms of their personality, genes and
experiences
Assumes that we should be able to establish a ‘normal’ behaviour
through the use of psychometric tests and thus use this to identify
abnormality.
3.
4.
This approach focuses on abnormality and looks at what makes
people ‘abnormal’ and therefore different to what we call ‘normal’.
Assumptions question – 2 mins to
answer
○
Outline one assumption of the individual
differences approach (2)
Outline one assumption of the individual differences approach [2]
0 marks – No or irrelevant answer
1 mark – Assumption is identified. Description is basic and lacks detail.
Some understanding may be evident. Expression generally poor.
2 marks – Description of assumption is accurate. Detail is appropriate and
understanding is very good. Fine details may be added. Expression and use
of psychological terminology is good.
“How could the _______ approach
explain…”
○
How could the individual differences approach explain Personality
Disorder (4) – on hand out I have included a high and low band
example answer for this question. Below is what likely answers will
refer to.
○
Have a go at the question yourself – you have 4 minutes (5 with AT)
Uniqueness and assumptions of the approach - everyone differs
Evaluation – strengths
Strength
Evidence
Aims to look at the motivations behind
behaviour (what causes people to behave the
way they do). We learn about a wide variety of
behaviours because all behaviours, not just
average ones, are studied.
In Griffith's study he looked at the different thought
processes and use of heuristics and irrational
verbalisations in those who gamble regularly and those
who gable occasionally. This demonstrated the
differences in the though processed and shows that
people have different thought processes towards
gambling
Can be useful in improving the experiences of
people with mental health problems – e.g.
Thigpen and Cleckley, Rosenhan and Griffiths
In Rosenhan's study he aimed to improve the treatment of patients
in a psychiatric wards. He showed that people should be treated as
individual people and that they should not be lumped together and
labelled as simply mentally ill. This supports the approach as it
shows that we need to treat people as individuals
High in Ecological Validity – e.g. Rosenhan,
Griffiths
In Rosenhan's study it was carried out in 12 real psychiatric wards with
real patients. The pseudo patients were able to see how the method of
treating all psychiatric illnesses collectively affected the individual
patients. This supports the individual approach as it shows that people
need to be treated as individuals ad not as one person
We can use objective psychometric tests to
show the difference between normal and
abnormal, and to measure differences between
individuals
In Thigpen and Cleckley they used the results of tests such as IQ,
EEG and ink blot test to prove that their were MPD as it was more
objective and more reliable than the observations of the
researchers. This links to the individual approach as it gives a
reliable measure of differences this lends scientific support to the
approach.
As people are all unique the only way we can
look at them is to see them as an individual
(the idiographic approach)
Thigpen & Cleckley collected results from tests for each
of Eve's personalities and treated each of them as a if
they were different people. This supports the individual
approach as they looked as each of the personalities as
individuals
Evaluation – weaknesses
Weakness
Evidence
Ignores the influence of
the situation affecting
behaviour
When Rosenhan's pseudo patients were collecting data re the
responses of the staff at the hospitals they failed to note what the
staff were doing, were they in a rush or just wandering. This shows
that not taking the situation in to account can lead to invalid results
Ethical concerns may be
raised about the study of
an unusual condition
Thigpen and Cleckley may have just used Eve for their research rather than to
treat her condition. This shows a weakness of the study as because the cases
are individual and unique that can also be very sensitive and difficult to
ethically investigate
Thingpen and Cleakcley's study about Eve White cannot be generalised to any
other MPD cases as her case is unique and may contain things that will be
found in no other case. This shows the weakness of a case study. Also this
shows that having a unique case shows that the assumption that states we
should be able to find a 'normal' behaviour is invalid
Small samples/case
studies leads to problems
with generalisability –
Lacking in control over
the environment
In Rosenhan's study the researches told the pseudo patients that they
had to get them selves out of the hospitals, this left it up to the pseudo
patient to convince the staff they were fit to be discharged. This shows
that the lack of control can have a negative affect in the people involved,
some of the pseudo patients were in hospital for up to 52 days and
during this time they suffered powerlessness and depersonalisation
This types of research
can create labels as it
separates normal from
abnormal
In Griffiths study the participants were labeled as regular gamblers
which could lead to other viewing them as an addict. This shows
that, due to the sensitive nature of the illnesses that this method
studies, the labels formed could have long lasting negative affects.
12 mark essay question
○
Evaluate the strengths and
weaknesses of the individual
differences approach using examples
from the core studies to support your
argument (12)
Strengths
P:
Strength of Approach
E:
Example from a study to support your point
C:
Explain your example in detail and how it demonstrates your original point
P:
E:
C:
Weaknesses
P
E
C
P
E
C
weakness from the approach
Example Answers
○
Use the mark scheme to mark the
example answers which are on your
handout – you have 10 minutes
○
Feedback your scores and reason for
your scores
○
Then, reflect on your own plan – would it
have been sufficient?
Similarities and Differences
Make and fill in the grid with one
similarity and one difference
between the studies!
Example Question:
○ Outline one similarity and one difference
between any core studies under the
individual differences approach
○
○
3 marks – Description of similarity is
accurate and has elaboration.
Understanding is good.
3 marks – Description of difference is
accurate and has elaboration.
Understanding is good.
Rosenhan
Rosenhan
Thigpen and
Cleckley
Griffiths
Thigpen and
Griffiths
Cleckley
Rosenhan
Thigpen
and
Cleckley
Rosenhan
Thigpen and Cleckley
Griffiths
Make sure it relates to
the methodology.
Difference
Difference
T&C was a case study as it was
an in-depth study of a unique
case of MPD. Where as Rosenhan
was a field experiment as it was
in the natural setting of a
psychiatric ward.
Similarity
(^ Ecological validity 12
hospitals where as T&C have low
Both of the studies were
EV as it was not her natural
longitudinal studies as they took
place over a long period of time. For setting and was their research
example T&C carried out interviews lab
over 100 hours of interviews to gain
an understanding of her disorder.
Rosenhan's pseudo-patients
remained in hospital for an average
of 19 days where they recorded
their findings on how the staff
treated the patients
Griffiths
Similarity
Both studies had a high
ecological validity as they were
carried out in a natural setting.
Rosenhan's took place 12 real
psychiatric wards with real dr's
nurses and patients presentand
Griffith's took place in a real
arcade on real fruit machines
with real money
Difference
Griffith's study is more
generalisable then T&C
because he had 60
participants and a mix of men
and women. On the other
hand T&C were only studying
one person with a unique
case of MPD
Rosenhan's study was longitudinal
as it took place over an average of
19 days allowing him to gather
indepth data, where as Girffiths
study was a snapshot study as he
only observed his sample at one
occasion
Similarity
Both were Quasi
experiments as in both cases
the IV was naturally
occurring. In T&C it was Eve
White presenting with MPD
and in Griffiths it was wether
the participants were regular
or non regular gamblers.