Many of the children suffered cognitive deficits but this might have rather been a result of a lack of substantial intellectual stimulation within the institutions as opposed to privation. Also approximately only half of the Romanian orphans showed mental deficits from the start even though they had all come from the same institution. Perhaps the other half like the Koluchova twins had overcome privation by using each other as effective forms of substitute care replacing the role of an adult
They were given a black box with four holes with a black curtain over them. They were told that there was something scary on the inside but they had to figure out what it was. Once again, the mother was told she could help if she found it necessary. The results for this test were similar to the first in that there were no significant increases in being overprotective or having anxiety. One thing they expected to find in the experiment would be that the mothers and children that were clinically anxious would have higher scores and correlations than the ones who weren’t but the results were insignificant.
Deffenbacher et al did a meta analysis from 21 studies they looked at 18 studies and found that higher anxiety has a negative impact on recall for the eyewitness. A meta analysis is good because it ensures that all the faults in the experiments cancel each other out and the fact that it was from different studies suggests there is a high validity. However by saying this, what type the experiments were are not known. For example if they were predominantly lab experiments then this will lack ecological validity and factors like demand characteristics, experimenter bias and the halo effect may have come into effect. Further support comes from Kohler et al (2002) who gave particpants 50 words and measured the galvine skin resistance (GSR) for the levels of stress.
They found that generally the younger age groups were better at recall, but all age groups were better at recognising their own age group. They concluded that it’s easier to recall people in your own age range. This experiment was conducted in a lab, so lacks mundane realism and so would have affected the results. Also, individual differences would have affected the results because some of the photos may look like people you know, so recall would be better. Yarmey conducted an experiment to see if age affects recall ability (1993).
Forty years ago, in an era of far more overt conflict between the generations than there is now, a slightly smaller share (74%) of the public said yes to the same question.2 What could explain the similarities in the two numbers in the face of such differences in the two eras? This latest survey appears to solve the mystery. Yes, there are big differences between young and old today in their values, attitudes and behaviors, but no, these differences haven’t created conflicts between the generations. To borrow a phrase, the generations appear to have found a way to disagree without being disagreeable. [pic]Moreover, where perceived generational differences exist today about moral values, work ethic and respect for others, today’s young adults — by heavy margins — believe that these differences have arisen because their generation hasn’t lived up to standards set by older adults.
Whether the experiment went horribly wrong or horribly right is entirely a matter of opinion, although the “horrible” seems pretty clear cut. The experiment showed how good, perfectly normal people were capable of assuming roles quite contrary to their nature. The guards and prisoners were self-selecting sample groups, offered $15 dollars a day in exchange for their voluntary involvement in the experiment. Their backgrounds were checked to make sure they had no records of mental illness, violence or criminal activity. These bright, mentally and physically healthy young men were selected at random into 2 groups of nine, one of which were designated as guards, the other as prisoners.
Roles do not just regulate behavior, but create an identity. The Stanford Prison Experiment shows that people often become the role they play involuntarily through performing the role and through relationships with others. The experiment gives light to how easily people are controlled by the roles they fill through the process of socialization. The roles people take are often conferred upon them. Although the participants of the Stanford Prison Experiment had the option of participating in the experiment, they were not given the choice of choosing their role.
There were 22 participants’ chosen for the role of either guards or inmates and 2 other participants were selected for the role of “warden” and “superintendent.” The guards and inmates were randomly assigned and instructed only on what they needed to know. In the case of the guards there was a one day seminar prior to day one of the experiment where they were informed not to use physical force. The prisoners were also instructed against the use of physical force. The day of the experiment the prisoners were arrested in a realistic manner and were assimilated into the standard induction process before lock down, including delousing and removal of personal belongings in an attempt to depersonalize the participants so they might adopt their roles in a more authentic fashion. The prisoners, who originally were only convicted to their “punishment” for the sake of science, had a more difficult time adjusting to the new life style than that of their guard counterparts, with half the prisoner sample dropping within the
This recent study conducted by a group of researcher also noted that they were not sure as to the cause. Many of the earlier research have found that the first-born child does have a higher IQ. However, as researchers follow their subject they are finding that the first-born child does seem to be more successful. Nevertheless, in retro spec one has to keep in mind that most of the following research based on the male population. This imbalance in the research is due to the stereotyping of women in years past.
Studies indicate that all people are more likely to remember wrong information when they are emotionally involved in the memory (Gallo, et al, 2009). Some studies indicate that as people age, they have better memory recall for positive events, but this data is inconclusive (Gallo, et al, 2009). However, both children and elderly adults are more confident than is realistic about their ability to recall information accurately. Both believe that their memory skills are more efficient than they truly are (Matlin, 2013). In children this is true due to their lack of experience in the area.