click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Sociocultural ERQs
End of Year I Exam
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| ERQ Introduction Paragraph | Hook; State Topic; Describe issues raised; Explain Importance; Summarize studies |
| ERQ General Knowledge Paragraph | State relevant theory; Evaluate study; Link to topic |
| ERQ Evidence Paragraph | Detailed description of study; explain what study tells; link to topic |
| Research Methods, Ethical Considerations | Tajfel (1971); Howarth (2002) |
| Social Identity Theory | Tajfel (1971); Howarth (2002) |
| Social Cognitive Theory | Bandura (1961); Konjin (2007) |
| Development of Stereotypes | Hamilton and Rose (1980); Hamilton and Gifford (1976) |
| Effect of Stereotypes | Cohen (1981); Steele and Aronson (1995) |
| Tajfel Aim | Test whether grouping is enough to produce prejudice between groups of similar people |
| Tajfel Participants | 48 14-15 year old boys |
| Tajfel Procedures | Assigned to two groups; Distribute money using a matrix |
| Tajfel Results | Fairer choices with same group interactions; More money to same group. |
| Tajfel Conclusions | Further research was necessary to make a conclusion |
| Tajfel Strengths | Laboratory method controls variables; cause and effect possible to be established; Replicable |
| Tajfel Weaknesses | Biased samples; Low ecological validity |
| Bandura Aim | Determine whether children would replicate aggressive behavior |
| Bandura Participants | 36 male children; 36 female children |
| Bandura Procedures | Aggressive model, nonaggressive model, or no model; Same or opposite sex model; Observed for 20 minutes |
| Bandura Results | Children with aggressive model more imitative of aggressive responses; Girls more physical aggressive if model male, verbal if model was female; Boys likely to imitate same sex models |
| Bandura Conclusions | Witnessing aggression in a model enough to produce aggression by an observer |
| Bandura Strengths | Controlled variables |
| Bandura Weaknesses | Ecological validity; inconsistent with similar research; Ethics |
| Konjin Aim | |
| Konjin Participants | |
| Konjin Procedures | |
| Konjin Results | |
| Konjin Conclusions | |
| Konjin Strengths | |
| Konjin Weaknesses |