Flashcards by rose9888, updated more than 1 year ago



Resource summary

Question Answer
what are the key main theories for failure for dieting? Weight Set Point Theory - Bennet + Gurin Boundary Model - Herman + Polivy
outline the A01 for the weight set point theory - biological explanation suggesting weight is under genetic control - internal system regulating the % of body fat - body fat + weight depends on internal biological controls - dieting attempts to over power set point (the point which you are optimum weight to have optimistic efficiency and mood) - Set point can't tell difference between starvation and dieting - dieter feels hungry - burns cals slower as metabolic rate reduced - body stores energy and cals body reaches plateau
Explain Keys et al support for weight set Point theory - semi starvation during WW11 - young men agreed to loose 25% body weight + ate 50% of normal cals - initially weight loss quick but then reached plateau (direct support) - irritable, hungry, obsessive thoughts about food (direct support) - metabolic rate decreased - became lethargic + avoided physical activity
what can adopted/ twin studies tell us about weight set point theory - Adopted children weigh more similar to bio parents - MZ twins (100% same genes) even when reared apart more similar weight compared to DZ
Rosenbaum and Hirsch - support for the weight set point theory - functional magnetic resonance imaging to monitor brain activity before and after dieting - After dieting - food scans showed larger response from section of reward than control - support + its objective Physiological evidence strengthening validity
Outline the A01 for the boundary model - dieting = dieter putting on weight - physiological determined boundaries for hunger and satiety - unpleasant qualities of hunger keep food intake above minimum level - unpleasant level of satiety keeps below max - suggest eating is determined by biofeedback - between boundaries lies a zone of biological indifference - eating regulated by social and enviro factors - Dieters - cognitively determined diet boundary - if they go over boundary what the hell effect takes over - eat up to satiety boundary
what research evidence supports the boundary model Herman and Mack - measured what they ate in a pre load taste test - non dieters ate less after high pre load due to fullness - dieter ate more after high pre load - supporting what the hell effect went passed their cognitive boundary = what the hell
what are the strengths of Herman and Mack's research - reduced demand characteristics by pretending they were looking at taste - strengthening reseach for boundary model - however only done on women, if applied could be danger of beta bias
What are the IDA point for Boundary Model? Takes in to account lots of approaches Cognitive: boundary decided by dieter Biological: hunger and satiety boundary Social: How we are effected by social factors
what are the two explanations for success in dieting? Ogden Psychological model Attention to detail
outline the A01 Of Ogden Psychological model - Key Psychological differences between successful/unsuccessful - successful dieters: - see it as less hormonal/ genetic instead focus on it as behavior -psychological motives e.g goal for more confidence - use psychological techniques e.g establishing new identity - importance of psychological can be triggered by life events: age, divorce
what support is there for the Ogden Psychological model? Ogden; -questionnaire explore factors associated with success and maintenance - split into groups; stable obese, weight loss re gainers, weight loss maintainers - WLM - lighter before lost weight +dieted longer - WLM - less likely to endorse medical explanation - greater endorsement on psychological consequences of obesity - WLM - motivation is for psychological reasons e.g enhance confidence rather than medical pressure - HOWEVER : WLM lighter before weight loss may be genetic difference
outline the A01 for attention to detail - successful dieter pay attention to details of a healthy diet - preventing them getting bored of repetition - focus on key details of the food e.g crunchy cucumber - detail helps maintain healthy diet
what is the research evidence for attention to detail Redden; -ppt ate 22 flavours of jellybeans - those who had been given specific detail - e.g cherry enjoyed jellybean longer - both rated it equally at beginning but then longer duration one with specific label liked it more - support as more detail = more enjoyable
what are the practical applications for the explanations for success and failure for dieting - could make dieting companies more successful by encouraging them to focus on detail - reminding people they have the control to change - set point theory can reassure why people aren't loosing as much as they wanted - boundary model can encourage realistic goals to be set
Gender bias within the explanations of failure and success of dieting - research focus on women as most likely to diet - being obese more impact on men as put on around abdomen - women around bum and thighs - more health risk for me - possibly should be researched separately
Free will and Determinism within the explanations of success and failure of dieting - free will - Ogden psychological focuses on individual having control to change themselves having autonomy believing that they can have control over weight = succeed determinism- set point innate control system maintaining weight, bio focus =people give up
explain how neural mechanisms are involved in controlling eating behavior (short term) 1.time from meal increases 2.hunger signals begin; low blood glucose levels, ghrenlin high, CCK hormone low 3.activates the lateral hypothalamus= feeling of hunger so eat 4. satiety signals; high blood glucose levels, low ghrenlin, CCK high 5. activates ventromedial hypothalamus = feeding stops + feel full
what is Ghrenlins role in the neural mechanisms controlling eating behavior CCK hormone role? Ghrenlin; secreated from the stomach proportionate to the emptiness, acts directly from the brain CCK hormone; signals satiety
what are the two brain regions and what are they centers for Lateral hypothalamus - hunger center ventromedial hypothalamus - Satiety center
explain how neural mechanisms control eating behavior (long term) - andipocytes store fat, when they store too much leptin is released - Leptin sends messages to the hypothalamus making you feel full and satiety - helping to maintain weight
what is the research evidence for Lateral Hypothalamus ANAND + BROBECK - lesion in the lateral hypothalamus = loss of feeding aphagia = suggesting feeding Centre in rats
what research evidence is there for the ventromedial hypothalamus Hetherington + Ranson: study where lesions were made to ventromedial hypothalamus(satiety) rats with this damaged = over ate and became dramatically obese - supporting Ventromedial hypothalamus as satiety center
what are the methodological strengths of Hetherington and Ranson, Anand and brobecks research - lesions, specific damage = specific findings - lab experiment = high control allowing identification of the specific brain mechanisms - rats = low ecological validity cannot conclude we are the same- however rats have same brain structure so might possibly
what research evidence is there for leptin - neural mechanisms + what is the problem with this research - Carlson - obese mice had no leptin - but lost weight when injected - oversimplified - most people have normal/ more leptin - so brain mechanisms are possibly insensitive to the effects of leptin/ communication difficulty
what are the practical applications of neural mechanisms may offer treatment for those with anorexia and also those with obesity strengthening the explanation
what approaches does neural mechanisms ignore behavioural: - Schacter et al: experiment measuring amount crackers obese people ate, ate more when manipulated dinner time on clock - classical conditioning - Becker Fiji anorexia increased when tv introduced SLT - social: may want to do something to please - cognitive: resist eating
explain how Evolution has influenced our food preferences - food preferences which enabled survival, more likely to survive in gene pool - natural selection - evolved in EEA - lived in hunter gatherer communities - men hunted animals + women fruit - many no longer useful - especially in societies were food is readily available but do have some 'evolutionary hangovers'
what specific preferences evolved from the EEA - Sweet foods - enorage eat fruit containing fructose = cals needed for fight/ flight - Salty foods - balance sodium, limited so when available had a lot - may also lead to preference met - protein - High Fat Foods - limited but fat X2 the amount of cals - those who ate high fat more likely to survive - Binge Eating - adaptive in EEA as when migrated they would binge eat as didn't know when next meal was Neophobia - fear/ avoidance unfamiliar foods - prevent us getting poisoned Taste Aversion Learning - link nausea with taste - avoid illness/ poisoned
what study supports sweet food preferences Desor et al - using face expression and sucking behavior found 1-3 day old babies preferred sweet fluids to non - support sweet food preferences evolutionary preference - as that young couldn't have learnt preferences
what study supports taste aversion Garcia + Koelling Rats easily learnt to avoid flavored water after being sick easier than electric shock
what did Bernstein and Websters reseach show - novel tasting ice cream on Chemo patients - patients developed aversion to this ice cream - led to scapegoating - blamed illness on the novel tasting food hadn't had before - so could still eat/ weren't avoided foods they liked - supports Taste aversion - avoided it once ill - supports neophobia - avoided/ blamed on unfamiliar food Practical application: give cancer patients food they are unfamiliar of
what is do Garfinkel + garner suggest anorexia is caused by anorexia - defect in their lateral hypothalamus - stop the switching on eating
what research is there for Garfinkel and Garners neural explanation - Anand + Brobeck - lesioned lateral hypothalamus in rats = starved themselves to death - support as when damaged didn't eat - Kaye suggests different reasons for the onset of anorexia - including psychological traits including perfectionism, anxiety - hormonal changes - overall weaken explanation suggest different reasons - Anorexics feel hungry - weaken as if it was due to deficit in lateral hypothalamus - wouldn't
what is kaye's explaination for the onset of anorexia increased serotonin activity in areas of the brain regulating mood + cognitions e.g anxiety = onset as leads to anxiousness, obsessive behavior + perfectionist traits
what support is their for Kaye's Neural explanation Kaye's research: - anxiety, obsessiveness, perfectionism traits many anorexics have - could be onset - hormonal changes in puberty in women lead to serotonin dysregulation - typical age for onset of anorexia is 13- 18 - supports reason why the majority of cases are that age
what is the serotonin neural explanation Serotonin is made from tryptophan - which comes from food Serotonin = anxiety so people reduce what they eat reducing tryptophan + serotonin = less anxiety
what support is there for the neural mechanism, seritonin explanation for anorexia bailer et al PET scans - chemical tracer which combines with serotonin - travels to brain and shines bright when serotonin present - studying AN recovers - highest levels serotonin was in most anxious supports idea that serotonin is made by tryptophan - as would be eating food
what is the dopamine explanation for neural explanation for AN over activity of dopamine receptors in the basal ganglia - brains reward centre - may fail to respond/ doesn't need other natural pleasure giving stimuli
what support is there for the over activity of dopamine receptors as an explaination for AN what is good about the study, what problems Kaye et al - PET scan compare dopamine activity. - 10 recovering anorexics, 12 healthy - found activity was significantly higher in recovering anorexics Good: PET scans; objective reliable data Problems; causality cannot establish if that caused AN or if anorexia cause it possible third factor but by studying recovering Anorexics can establish cause and effect and eliminate 3rd factor
what are the practical applications of neural mechanisms explaining AN - can offer medication which can normalize neurotransmitter levels - doesn't put blame on parents unlike psychodynamic
discuss the determinism gender bias approaches of the neural mechanism in explaining AN - deterministic - focuses on the biology playing a role = patients passively accepting making no effort to get better - gender bias - all reseach done on women ignores men - biological differences - focuses on biological approach - fails to look at social/ psychodynamic ect
what are the two evolutionary explanations for AN The adapted to flee hypothesis the reproductive suppression hypothesis
outline the reproductive suppression hypothesis - physical side effect of AN is amenorrhea (loss of menstrual cycle - the body realizes that the body is incapable of carry a baby so stops producing eggs - Wasser and Barash - suggest its an adaptive mechanism as women can only look after/ give birth to few children - if they give birth in unfavorable environment evolutionary disadvantage as new born put pressure on resources threatening others chance survival - by controlling intake of food have control of fertility - so can produce child at optimum time - Surbey - AN as a disordered variant of females adaptive ability to alter timings of reproduction - delaying fertility may better provide for off spring
outline the A01 for the adapted to flee hypothesis - Guisinger: features of AN; restriction of food, denial of starvation + hyperactivity = adaptive mechanisms - usually person begins to loose weight - psychological mechanisms take over to conserve energy + desire to eat - HOWEVER - in EEA nomads who foraged foods - when food sources low somewhere the survival benefit was to go elsewhere - efficient migration = switching off the usual responses instead restless, energetic, optimistically denying they were thin - no longer adaptive response -but proposed that low body weight = individual respond as though they must migrate from famine
explain the 'general' support/ strengths for evolutionary explanations - Holland et al - MZ twins had highest concordance 100% same genetics. shows affects minority of people - highlights ID however evidence limited doesn't highlight specific EV EX - Bell middle ages pious women fasted = holy anorexia RC recognised miraculous ability supports symptoms - low body weight disturbance to body shape due to influence of being holy/ recognised * shows AN to be a choice (Behavioral - going against EV) * however support EV as shows not just in modern society - Keel and Kump meta analysis of cross cultural studies concluded not culture bound disorder all cultures showed it but western more * no cultural bias - strengthening ex generalizable However must be some aspect social culture influencing nature nurture
what support/ comments is there for the reproduction suppression hypothesis - menarche: onset of puberty is delayed in girls with AN - supporting as it delays fertility so less likely to get pregnant - Gender: RSH only applies to women - fails to explain why men an - no evolutionary benefits for man to reproduce
what support/ comments are there for the adapted to flee hypothesis? - Mrosovsky + Sherry: many species stop eating when they migrate - supports hyperactivity removes need for food - support symptoms of persistent restriction of energy intake Epling and Peirce: Animals show hyperactivity when food short: Rats starved in lab excessive exercise + ignored food Both research done on animals risky applying it Guisnger claims that the AFFH relives therapists need to search for familial reasons - a struggle between control: one hand worried and the uncomprehending family other hand bio urge to avoid food weakens slightly as suggest family input may have slight influence IDA: explains anorexia in both sexes
what are the psychological explanations of AN Sociocultural theory Psychodynamic
outline the social cultural explanation - casual factor of AN is equate slimness with attractiveness - found in cultures where food abundant - media propagate this image - showing slim models on tv/ magz - internalize this image -SLT people learn through watching role models then encouraged to watch due to vicarious reinforcement as see models enjoying glamorous life - some cases it = tension between actual self and ideal self = dissatisfaction with body weight and size - lead to dieting + obsession with food - further strengthened by operant conditioning - reinforcing the learnt behavior as dieters have praise + attention for loosing weight (positive reinforcement) encourages them to loose more weight
outline Beckers support for the sociocultural explanation + the strengths and weaknesses of this research * Becker: effects of Tv when introduced to Fiji - did questionnaire towards eating 3yrs later questionnaire + interview on impact - 1995 3% reported vomited to control weight 1998 15% - 1995 13% high score on eating questionnaire indicating risk of eating disorder 1998 29% - more at risk the more TV watched support - indicates strong link between western ideas of thinness and changed attitudes towards eating girls internalized what was described as attractive - reinforced by vicarious reinforcement + naturally occurring change = high ecological validity - however no controls but only done on females + theory only applies to women
what are the IDA points for sociocultural theory * practical application - reduce the exposure to western cultures so people don't feel pressured = reducing the use of extremely thin models e.g France catwalk models have to have BMI of 18 or + ensure AN not caused by models * Approaches: doesn't explain why some people who watch TV get AN and some don't - doesn't consider biological influence of serotonin deregulation * Gender : Research all done on females + theory largely applies to females - danger of beta bias if applied to men as It ignores the possible differences
what other research evidence is there for the sociocultural theory * Keel and Kump reviewed cross cultural studies into eating disorders - found not culturally bound but more western more AN - weaken as shows in all cultures but does show that more western the more change of AN * Groesz et al meta review 25 studies concluded body dissatisfaction significantly increased after exposure to media of thin women - most efficient on girls under 19 - support tension dissatisfaction with ideal self and actual self
what are the 2 parts of the psychodynamic explanation for AN Refusal of adult sexuality Asserting control
outline the refusal of adult sexuality as an explanation of AN * freud 'AN is a melancholia occurring where sexuality has underdeveloped - eating can substitute sexual expression eating disorders may be away of repressing sexual impulses - express fear of adult sexuality/ becoming pregnant, eating acts as symbolic penetration (defense mechanism: * displacement: worrying placed on to food * denial - of maturity - flat stomach reinforces not pregnant) *Crisp: self starvation +weight loss = postponement of ministration in pre pubertal stage + amenorrhea - attempting to remain in pre pubertal phase * starvation - avoid development of adult body - preventing secondary characteristics - breasts + hips - avoiding anxieties associated with adulthood and mature sexuality possibly fixation in oral stage - still want to be dependent + possible fixation anal stage - want to remain in control
outline asserting control as an explanation of AN *Bruch: origins of AN early childhood - effective parenting - respond appropriately to child needs Vs Ineffective parenting fail to respond to childs needs e.g baby cries due to anxiety but parent feeds them = child confused about internal needs + reliant on parents adolescence increases desire to establish autonomy - unable to do so as feel don't own bodies - over compensate helplessness - excessive control over body shape and size = abnormal eating
what is the general evaluation for the psychodynamic explanation - difficult to test scientifically + based on case studies polivy and herman - highlight that most research is correlational + carried out after diagnosis - difficult to determine whether dysfunctional fam = AN or other way or if possible 3rd factor ignores bio approach - which may make some more vunerable than others
what support is there for asserting control * Button and Warren: anorexics often reported lack of control over their lives - support as ACH suggests that anorexia trying to get control * Steiner et al parents of adolescents with AN tend to define physical needs * Bruch e.g found many parents anticipate childrens need rather than letting them feel hungry Support idea that ineffective parenting = children not understanding body and wanting control
what support this there for the refusal of adult sexuality Carter et al 48% of 77 anorexic females reported childhood sexual abuse supports RAS as they then have a fear of sexuality so then deny this + take control
Outline how early learning + experiences can shape food preferences - neophobia - we avoid new foods - but once exposed change our preferences as we like foods we are familiar with *SLT - observe others eating behavior then model/ obs learning - can change food preferences as model what others are eating * operant conditioning food eaten - PR rewarded - repeat action - strengthening behavior *Classical conditioning: Food preferences UCS Praise + UCR happy UCS praise + NS carrot = UCR happy CS carrot = CR happy * classical conditioning - Taste aversion learning UCS poison = UCS sickness UCS poison + NS sheep = UCR sickness CS sheep= CR sickness
what research evidence is there for the early learning + experiences as an explanation for food preferences Birch: rewarding eating with positive adult attention effective in changing food preferences - supports classical conditioning Birch: when children sat next to child with different veg preference after 4 days veg preference shifted - support SLT child was role model as easily identified - copied behavior Birch + Martin: food exposure - direct relationship between exposure and food preferences (8-10 exposures needed before preference changed)
what are the Practical application points for early learning + experiences * practical ap: gov campaigns to reduce obesity use role models easily identifiable parents inviting children who they know eat fruit and veg Lowe et al: shown videos of food dude increased consumption of fruit and veg = changed preference
what is the nature nurture debate with food preference- early learning experiences *nature nurture: cannot be just down to SLT ect, Neophobia would have had survival benefit as some foods poisonous/ dangerous - avoiding it would have survival benefifts (NATURE) Benton supports nature explanation: sweet foods are effective in reducing stress in young babies = innate food preference desor: facial behaviors + sucking behavior - 1-3 day old babies prefer sweet fluids - suggesting innate possibly due to the ev fruite fructose
explain using a study what approach the early learning experience ignores Lepper: imaginary foods either non contigent condition based on eating other/ non contigent condition listened to a story: asked what they would prefer to have non contigent condition = no food preference Contigent preferred one said first Behaviorism incomplete - only listened to story so no conditioned learning - cognitive ex
outline the opiate hypothesis in explaining how mood effects food preferences neutrotransmitters called endorphins regulate acitivity in the brains reward pathway Pathways make us feel good encourages eating + sex
what support/ comments is for the opiate hypothesis Grag et al: sweet home Alabama study film successfully manipulated desired emotions - consumed sig more pop corn when watching sad 28% more Sad: 124.97 happy:97.97 suggesting people eat hedgnistic foods when sad study good: repeated measures controlled for boredom/ people liking pop corn lab experiment - high controls
what approach does opiate hypothesis focus on and what does it ignore biological approach as looks at the biology and chem in the brain ignores behavioral e.g conditioning the food preferences Cognitive ABC model ect
outline + give research for the individual differences model individual difference model: only certain groups are effected differences in learning, history, bio, attitudes = high + low vulnerability both have physical/ psychological changes high vun = emotional eaters - eat more during neg emotional states - may learn to associate hunger and anxiety Conner et al investigated whether id had affect on eating behavior - asked to keep DH diary + completed questionnaire assessing 3 dimensions: restrained eating, emotional eating + external eating ^ DH positive relationship between snacking low DH for those who scored low extrernal eating
outline and provide evidence for the General effect model General effect model: eat more to make ourselves feel better when stressed stress= physiological change =eating *support: Greeno and wing: housing conditions (long term stressor) = aggression assumed to be stressor Rats were aggressive in isolation + put weight on Syrian hamsters aggressive in groups + put weight on in groups - support as shows that stress = putting on *Bellisle et al - 12 men reported to hops for surgery - had to pick food + rate anxiety one month later had to choose lunch + rate anxiety higher anxiety on day of op but no difference in cals - Against GEM expect to put on
Show full summary Hide full summary


Biological Psychology - Stress
Gurdev Manchanda
History of Psychology
Psychology A1
Ellie Hughes
Memory Key words
Sammy :P
Psychology | Unit 4 | Addiction - Explanations
Psychology subject map
Jake Pickup
Bowlby's Theory of Attachment
Jessica Phillips
The Biological Approach to Psychology
Gabby Wood
Chapter 5: Short-term and Working Memory
Cognitive Psychology - Capacity and encoding
Tess W
Psychology and the MCAT
Sarah Egan