Anda di halaman 1dari 3

Core Studies Revision Notes Study title: Sperry (1968)

Approach: ____________________________

One Background point: cerebral cortex (frontal lobe, POT, perception, vision, auditory) thalamus (relay signals) Hypothalamus (temp and emotion) Cerebellum (little brain, movement and balance) Corpus callosum (connects hemispheres) stem (respiration heart rhythm) CROSS WIRED (SMELL) EPILEPSY Left hemisphere (major): words right hemisphere: pictures (silent) Study aim: Understand the psych effects of disconnection and therefore understand how normal brains work. Hypothesis: previous human study suggests no affect (Akelaitis, 1944) Many affects on animals (Myers, 1961) Variables: I.V. severed corpus callosum D.V performance on $ and ? test, composite words, and dual task. Method: Quasi experiment / case studies If experiment, what design: between subjects / independent measures Sample method: opportunity sample Sample details: 11 patients who had their cc severed to reduce severe epileptic seizures Males and females How was the study conducted? Projector screen one eye covered back projected on screen for 0.1 sec gap below screen to touch objects but not see what they were touching. Tasks: $ left ? right - draw or speak? composite words - key case touch or spell out/ speak Touching right hand/ left hand name it? Dual processing objects in both hands select from a pile What controls (e.g. double blind)? Standardised procedure Participant variables (same procedure) Findings/Results: $/? = draw $ with left hand, speak that they saw the ? Composite word: touch key with left hand spell out the word case with the right and speak it Touching task: right hand can name it left hand can only make wild guesses. Dual task: only find the object with the hand it was put in. Every day life these problems are overcome as information is not shown for only short periods, people can move their eyes etc. Researchers conclusions: 1. Hemispheres are dominant left hemisphere dominant in speech and reasoning, right hemisphere is dominant in spatial skills emotion and arithmetic 2. Two independent conscious two minds in one body however there are massive individual differences.

Evaluation Points (state whether a strength or weakness because.) How useful is the research: The research is useful for future research as it is one of the first studies to quantify the specific resources of the silent side of the brain. With this information future research can identify in more detail how the brains resources are used Validity (measurement): + The study was highly controlled as the procedure was identical for each participant - As the method was a quasi it does not allow for complete control of the participant variables Ecological Validity (realism): + The sample was representative of the abnormal population (CC severed) - The task had little mundane realism as you do not see things for 0.1 seconds at a time. Sample and population (Generalise?): + Sample had males and females in it and was a large proportion of the abnormal population - The sample did not include a control group for objective comparison to normal behaviour Data: + Large amounts of quantitative data allows for easy summary of results - Lack of qualitative data does not allow for full explanation of what is occurring; no description Ethics: + Confidentiality - Protection from psychological harm as they could be stressed and embarrassed 1 Debate it adds too: Nature-nurture as it suggests that behaviour can be completely determined by biology Suggest 2 improvements for the study and for each state the effect it would have on the study Improvement 1: Change the sample. I would do this by adding a control group of 50 people 25 men and 25 women who are matched for the same traits as the abnormal group. The control group would be tested on the same tasks. Effect: This would improve the objectivity of the results as the implied performance of normal people would be recorded. This would increase the internal validity of the results. It would also improve the ecological validity of the results as the sample would be representative of the abnormal population and the wider population. The results can therefore be generalised better. Improvement 2: Improve the content validity. I would do this by also adding more qualitative data. This could be done by asking each participant to have an interview after the tasks to explain what thoughts and feelings occurred as they tried to complete the tasks.

Effect: Firstly it would improve the internal validity of the results as the results would have more depth and explain how as well as what occurs. The major problem with introducing qualitative data is it increases the possibility for bias in the results as individuals may suffer from social desirability. Compared to one of the other studies of this approach Study: Similarity: Difference: