Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (630,000)
UTSC (30,000)
Psychology (8,000)
PSYB30H3 (500)
Lecture 3

PSYB30H3 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Innatism


Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSYB30H3
Professor
Marc A Fournier
Lecture
3

Page:
of 4
PSYB30 Lecture 3
Part I: Social Learning
Innatism and Empiricism
Story Simon Lemoge
- Early Behaviourism and Learning Culture
1. Jon B. Watson: Applied Pavlovian techniques to 9m-o child to show complex emotional
responses/fear could be learned through classical conditioning Loud noise is paired w/ rat then
just rat produces fear (started being afraid of things similar to “white rat”)
2. B. F. Skinner (1904-1990):
Extended Watson’s behaviorism beyond the level of Pavlovian conditioning into the more
complex arena of voluntary behavior
Thorndike’s Law of Effect—the effect produced by a behavior determines the behavior’s future
probability of occurrence cat and maze trial and error (3-4 mins)
Introduced the concepts of reinforcement, punishment, and shaping (process of rewarding
success approximation to a desired behavior)
- Strength of behaviorism was its reliance upon i.) observation, ii.) experimentation, and iii.)
simplicity of explanation
- The weakness of behaviorism was that it lost sight of the learner (i.e., the person) in the study of
learned behavior
- Bandura’s Theory of Social Learning
Emergent Properties: Intentions have causal properties like billiards
Triadic Reciprocal Causation: Person (P), Environment (E), Behavior (B) reciprocal, we select
them!
Fortuitous Determinants in Causal Structures: There is an element of chance in people’s lives
stuff happens (i.e. Bandura gave speech and some guy had to sit at a seat b/c he was late met
love of his life and married shortly)
- 5 Fundamental Human Capabilities
1. Symbolizing Capabilities: Ability to represent evens + relationships in symbolic form, test
possible solution symbolically in thought
2. Vicarious Capabilities: Capacity for observational learning enabling them to expand knowledge
and competencies through modeling and behaviour of others
3. Forethought Capability: Capacity of fore through ability to bring anticipated outcomes to
bear on current activities, anticipation of reinforcement either directly/vicariously
experienced
4. Self-Regulatory Capability: Require substitution of internal regulation and direction of external
sanction/self-regulation
Sub functions of self-regulation: Self-observation, judgmental processes, self-reaction
5. Self-Reflective: Foundation of human agency, expectancy of belief or behavioural competence to
confront a challenge
Sources: Personal/vicarious experiences of success/failure, social support and encouragement,
emotional experiences
Summary
Since the emergence of radical behaviorism, theorists have challenged the primacy of
classical/instrumental
Conditioning
Bandura’s social-cognitive theory introduces us to the idea of personal
agencyi.e., the human capacity for self-
regulation
Part II: Gender Socialization
- Types VS. Traits
“Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”
- Masculine and Feminine Traits
- 2 indp/statistically orthogonal dimension of
individ. Differences:
1. Instrumental-Masculine-Agentic
Characteristics (i.e. dominant, forceful,
competitive, individualistic)
- Situated Expression of Gender Differences
(i.e. affectionate, cheerful, tender,
compassionate)
- Gender Segregation
Eleanor Maccoby (1990, 1998):
Gender segregation is found in all cultural
settings in which children are in social
groups large enough to permit the choice of
same-sex interaction
Gender segregation emerges spontaneously in situations in which children are not under pressure
from parents to engage in cross-sex interaction
Behavior observation reveals that gender segregation is highly preferredthe ratio of same-sex to
cross-sex interaction is 3:1 at age four and 11:1 at age six
- War Games and Tea Parties
Boys in Same-Sex Interaction: Use commands/threats/boasts of authority, refuse to comply
with ther boy’s demands, interrupt one another, heckle and call names
Girls in Same-Sex Interaction: Allow other girls to speak, express agreement, acknowledge
another P.O.V
- Boys and girls tend to socialize in gender-segregated groups experiences influence social
behaviour
- Gender differences in social behaviour of adults should be most evident in same-sex social
interaction. Men act agentically w/ men, women act communally w/ women
- Gender, Situation and Behaviour
Event Sampling Procedure: Participants from community, collected interaction records, over 20
days
Plan of Data Analyse: DVs: Agentic and Communal Behaviour; IVs: Gender and Relationship
(SSF, OSF, RP)
Suh, Moskowitz, Fournier, Zuroff, 2004:
Summary
- Masculine and feminine traits viewed as bipolar ends of single dimension. Masculine and feminine
traits vied as ind. And complementary, rather than incompatible, dimensions
- Evidence that expression of gender differences is kind of situation-dependent in adulthood.
Through histories, men are mostly agentic w/ men, women are mostly communal w/ other women
Part III: Societal Division of Labour
- Origins of Sex Difference in Social Behaviour
Parental Investment: Men copulation; Women copulation, gestation, lactation
Constraints of Reproductive Success: Men how many; Women: Quantity and quality of
resources secured
Hypothesized Consequences: Men Total effort to short-term mating; Women Total effort to
long-term
Men should prefer women w/ attributed to fertility and reproductive value (i.e. age and health,
cues to REPRODUCTIVE CAPACITY), youth and physical attractiveness
Women should prefer men w/ ability + willingness to provide resources to parental protection
(RSOURCE ACQUISITION)
David M Buss: 37 samples from 33 countries (N=10,047), asked to rate how important
characteristics for selectin mate on sale of 0-3
(29/37 samples) WOMEN > MEN “ambition-industriousness”
(36/37 samples) WOMEN > MEN “good financial prospect”
(ALL 37 samples) MEN > WOMEN “attractiveness”
(ALL 37 samples) MEN > WOMEN “youth
- Men and women have sex-differentiated behaviour b/c they’ve faced different adaptive problem
of reproduction over history
- Consistency/invariance in sex differences supports species-typical explanation
- In societies, women have less power and status (gender hierarchy or patriarchy)
- Women, relative to men: Perform more domestic work, receive lower wages, spend fewer hours in
paid employment, concentrated in different occupation, thinly represented at highest levels of
organizational hierarchies
MEN
WOMEN
Resource Acquisition Behavior
Domestic or Household Behavior
High-Rank Dominant Behavior
Low-Rank Subordinate Behavior
InstrumentalAgentic Behavior
ExpressiveCommunal Behavior
- Eagly and Wood” Reanalyzed Buss’ 37-cultures data, reordered culture by sizes osf sex differences
and correlated rank orders of gender inequality
Gender Empowerment Measure: the extent to which women and men participate equally in
all economic, political, and decision-making roles
Gender-Related Development Index: the extent to which women and men have equal access
to education and literacy, wealth, and health care
- Men and women display sex-differentiated behaviour b/c concentration in different roles
(Provider and homemaker)
- Correlation b/w size of sex difference w/ UN indices support culture-specific explanation