The human brain is truly bizarre. The more I know about it, the less I understand it. OK, so I finally came to terms with the fact  that true and unfettered freewill is dead and buried some time ago. This was hard for me. My universe is not my play thing anymore. The decisions I make, the thoughts I entertain and even the people I'm attracted to are, at least to some extent, governed by processes outside of my awareness. And, if I'm not aware of these influences shaping my thoughts and behaviours, then I'm not truly free in making my own decisions.

Take for example, my lovely wife. I chose her, she chose me. A match made in heaven - perfect. End of story, right? Not quite.

In the IB Psychology Human Relationships option we study the learning outcome: Examine biological, psychological and social origins of attraction. [Actually, and off topic, if you don't study this option ask your Psychology teacher why - it's fascinating.]

It turns out that a lot of our attraction to another person is based on a particular set of immune system genes we both have, that we can both apparently sniff out (an olfactory sense). We are more attracted to those whom we share different major histocompatibility complex genes. Mix these genes together and we have children with stronger, healthier immune systems (conferring them survival and reproductive advantages vis-à-vis evolution). See Wedekind et al. (1995) for more details. 

We have no idea that this is happening. Our thoughts, decisions and behaviour are being influenced without our awareness, in a major way. Which I can accept, I see the evolutionary logic in it. But Williams and Burgh, the latest study to land on my desk just does my head in. Period. Holding a cold drink makes me perceive you as being a cold person?

Williams and Bargh (2008) staged job interviews with their participants. Each participant in their cleverly crafted experiment assumed the role of the interviewer and the interviewees were confederates. Before the interviews commenced another confederate engaged the participant in a lift (elevator) and had them hold either an iced coffee or a hot coffee - the experimental condition. Interviewers given the cold drink to hold judged the hapless interviewee as being less 'warm' and were much less likely to give them the job.

The mere fact of unconsciously priming an individual with physical feelings of cold or warmth, influenced perception and ultimately decision-making and behaviour. Our conscious choices may not be such an exercise in free will as we would all like to believe. Our cognitive thought processes are very easily manipulated.

You can  incorporate this information and this bizarre research study when you study or teach the IB Psychology CLOA learning outcome: With reference to relevant research studies, to what extent is one cognitive process reliable (for example, reconstructive memory, perception/visual illusions, decision‑making/heuristics)? The focus would be on decision‑making and the cognitive heuristics associated with much of our decision-making.

And finally, I know you're probably bursting with curiosity as to why feelings of hot and cold can have this very unusual influence on our thoughts. One of two reasons have been proposed. The first being that it is a simple side effect of having a fast, automatic response to familiar stimuli that lessens cognitive demands. Associations that can be formed automatically on the basis of prior knowledge or experience (i.e. priming) usually serve us well, and would have conferred survival benefits.

The other, less likely, explanation is that this is an innate response. We have been shaped by evolution to be more attracted to those who can keep us warm and less likely to freeze in our ice age caves. 

Whatever the reason, knowing that first impressions are all important, hand your job interviewer a cup of delicious hot coffee and shake hands using the nice warm hand that was just holding their coffee.  Just watch those job offers come rolling in.

The Williams & Bargh study will most definitely mess with your head! Watch the video below. Read the original 'Science' (oh! prestigious) publication above.

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology

Know thy command terms.

In search of perfect answers to your IB Psychology examination questions? You will need to start with the command term. "Outline two principles that define the cognitive level of analysis" will be answered differently from "Explain the two principles that define the cognitive level of analysis." Outline and Explain are both examples of command terms that can be used in short answer exam questions. That difference needs to be apparent in your answer to each question - you can be sure that the beady little eyes of the IB examiner will be scrutinising your answer for this information.

When answering IB Psychology exam questions it is important to identify the command term in each question. These will determine how you should answer the question. Command terms such as 'explain', 'outline', ‘examine’, 'to what extent', and so on carry different meanings and this should be reflected in your answers.

The command term in an examination question is very important. It provides two things the examiner is looking for and specifically awarding (or penalising!) you marks for. The first is structure. Are you structuring you answer according to the command term to answer the question? Secondly, has your answer ‘effectively addressed the command term’? 

Below is one of the markband descriptors IB Psychology examiners are using to mark you Short Answer Questions (i.e. those three 8 mark questions in the Paper 1 exam). Not addressing the command term will limit your maximum mark to 6 marks, instead of the full 8 had your answer effectively addressed the command term.

Author: Derek Burton – Passionate about IB Psychology

Picture this. You are a mad scientist. You place a large number of rats into individual containers filled with water, get out the stop watch and time how long it takes them to succumb to the inevitable – death by drowning. And, as if this isn’t mad enough already, half of these rats you then rescue from their watery grave. You take them out, towel them off, give them a bit of a blow dry, reassure them that it was all just a terrible mistake, and give them some food, a blanket to warm themselves and a teddy bear to cuddle as they try to overcome their ordeal. Then, (ha ha!) you place them back into their watery containers and time how long it takes them to drown this time. For real. Didn’t I tell you that you were a mad scientist? [For the impatient among you, skip to the end for the fascinating AND repellant results.]

A bizarre study has just landed on my desk. In the IB Psychology Diploma course we examine in detail the ethics of research studies in the learning outcome: Discuss ethical considerations related to research studies at the cognitive level of analysis (also at the biological and socio-cultural levels of analysis). And those choosing the Abnormal Psychology option (and that’s most of you out there) will probably look at major depression as an affective disorder, and explore the learning outcome: Analyse etiologies of one disorder. This study by Richter (1957) can be applied to both learning outcomes in IB Psychology.

Firstly, there are (now) clear guidelines in the American Psychological Association (APA) manual into the ethical treatment of animals when used in research studies. Guidelines which were obviously lacking in 1957. The following ethical guidelines have now been formulated:

Now while the results of Richter the mad rat torturer are astonishing (yes, we’ll come to these in a minute), there is no way they could have been predicted ahead of time. No hypothesis was formed, it was just a see what happens ‘study’ which, incidentally, came to provide great insight into some factors that can lead to depression. Thus, it fails the “…research’s potential to provide significant benefit …” test. In fact, what Richter was really interested in was the sudden deaths associated with Voodoo cultures when a victim had been cursed – a tenuous connection to drowning rats at best. It also begs the question as to what else he was doing to animals that was not making it into the scientific literature (rescuing them from the mouths of feral cats before feeding them to rabid dogs?).

Further: “If the procedure would cause pain to humans, it should be assumed that it will cause pain to animals (APA).” Super stressed animals suffering a protracted death cannot possibly be justified here. Poor rats. Trust your gut instincts. If this was not your initial reaction then consider taking this test.

Unethical? Definitely. So what insight does the research provide us into the etiologies of major depression? Now, we need to look at those results.

The average length of time at which rats stopped swimming and drowned in the ‘helplessness’ condition was short. Rats in this condition ceased swimming and drowned within minutes – they just gave up, submitting to what they believed was inevitable. 

The rescued rats swam for hours. Up to sixty hours of swimming, paddling and treading water was recorded in this dastardly study. Rescue a rat, provide them with some hope and they will fight and try and hang on in there until they have exhausted their physical and mental limits. 

A cause of depression linked suicide is the phenomenon of learned helplessness. Learned helplessness is all about feeling trapped in an insoluble situation. A depressed person can believe that his or her situation is impossible to escape. Through experience, people can think, feel and behave as if their situation is helpless, when it is not. Repeated exposure to these negative thoughts, feelings and behaviours can lead to depressive thoughts, and eventually … well, we know how some people eventually believe they can find some control in their lives. Control over how they can ultimately escape the situation.

If you cannot find your own way out. You will need to reach out and find that helping hand. Let’s just hope that that hand doesn’t belong to a mad scientist.

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology

Ever wondered what the perfect answer to an Extended Response Question looks like?

The Extended Response Questions (ERQs) in IB Psychology are the all important 22 mark essay questions in the Paper 1 and Paper 2 examinations, at both Higher and Standard Levels (HL and SL). The IB Psychology student has to master the preparation for these questions in order to achieve any level of success in their exams. 

There are no surprises in the IB Psychology exams. You know exactly which ERQs could be asked, they are given to you in the learning outcomes for the course. And, as such, you  need to prepare answers to each of these questions.

MALE BIAS AGAINST OBESE WOMEN.

You are on a jury, the facts and evidence are being presented and it's your job to weigh all of that information and make a judgement on the defendant's guilt. Most people could do this objectively and not let personal biases influence their decisions, right?

Wrong. There is a double whammy when you're a black defendant in the American justice system. We have known for a long time that black Americans are far more likely to be convicted than their white counterparts, and given harsher prison sentences when found guilty (see Three Worst Jury Verdicts).

Thanks to a team of Yale researchers, we now know that the criminal justice system is likely to be influenced by other negative stereotypes too. In the study, mock jurors were presented with a case of cheque fraud. The defendant was identified from one of four photographs (the experimental condition): large female, slim female, large man or slim man.

There was no fat bias when men and women were evaluating the guilt of the male defendants, and no fat bias emerged when female participants were judging the female defendants. But male jurors were significantly more likely to exhibit a fat bias when assessing the guilt or innocence of the female defendants. Males were more likely to judge fat women as being more likely to be guilty of cheque fraud on the basis of the same evidence, than the slimmer defendant.

But wait, it gets worse ... Slim male participants were the worst of all. Not only were they much more likely to find the obese woman defendant guilty, they were more likely to ascribe the obese woman defendants as being 'repeat offenders' and 'having more awareness of their crimes'.

As you explore the IB Psychology learning outcome: 'Explain the formation of stereotypes and their effect on behaviour', you will come to learn that that these negative stereotypes are activated automatically and below the level of conscious thought. They are also very, very difficult to overcome. Crash diet if you're a woman facing jury trial in America?

We're the smartest animal in the world. Fact. But, the human brain isn't the largest in the world. Fact. Nor do we have the largest number of neurons. Fact. So what explains our intelligence?

This TED Talk dives deep into neuroscience and evolutionary theory and draws the conclusion that our extraordinarily, even bizarrely, dense cerebral cortex uses the most energy for its weight in the animal kingdom. And the only way to release all of that energy from food is through developing the ability to cook.

The IB Biological Level of Analysis asks you to "Examine one evolutionary explanation of behaviour." Can you make the link?
 

Author: Derek Burton - Passionate about IB Psychology