Y1 Psychology: Biological Contemporary Study: Brendgen Et Al (2005)
This flashcard set covers key terms from the biological contemporary study by Brendgen et al. (2005), focusing on twin studies in psychology. It helps reinforce understanding of monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins, crucial for exploring genetic and environmental influences on behaviour.
What is a ‘monozygotic twin’?
Identical twins who share 100% of their DNA.
Key Terms
What is a ‘monozygotic twin’?
Identical twins who share 100% of their DNA.
What is a ‘dizygotic twin’?
Twins who share 50% of their DNA.
What were the 3 aims of this study?
1) To investigate whether social aggression could be caused by genes or the environment and whether social aggression shared the same cause as phys...
Who were used in the sample?
234 twin pairs from Quebec
Age 6
94 MZ twins
140 DZ twins of varying gender combos
What type of method was used?
Longitudinal study at 5, 18, 30, 48, and 60 months and then again at 6 years.
What data was gathered from this method?
Two ratings, gathered in the spring term, of each twin’s behaviour (one by their teacher and classmates).
Related Flashcard Decks
Study Tips
- Press F to enter focus mode for distraction-free studying
- Review cards regularly to improve retention
- Try to recall the answer before flipping the card
- Share this deck with friends to study together
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
What is a ‘monozygotic twin’? | Identical twins who share 100% of their DNA. |
What is a ‘dizygotic twin’? | Twins who share 50% of their DNA. |
What were the 3 aims of this study? | 1) To investigate whether social aggression could be caused by genes or the environment and whether social aggression shared the same cause as physical aggression |
Who were used in the sample? |
|
What type of method was used? | Longitudinal study at 5, 18, 30, 48, and 60 months and then again at 6 years. |
What data was gathered from this method? | Two ratings, gathered in the spring term, of each twin’s behaviour (one by their teacher and classmates). |
What did the teacher ratings consist of? |
|
What did the peer ratings consist of? |
|
What were the results of Brendgen’s study for AIM1? |
|
What can we conclude from the results of AIM1? | That physical aggression may be a result of genes and that social aggression may be the result of environmental factors. |
What were the results of Brendgen’s study for AIM2? | A correlation was found between physical and social aggression in the children that was best explained by genes. |
What can we conclude from the results of AIM2? | That aggressive tendencies in general are down to genetic factors but the expression of these tendencies is down to the environment. |
What were the results of Brendgen’s study for AIM3? | The data suggested that physical aggression may lead to social aggression but not the other way round. |
What can we conclude from the results of AIM3? | That the expression of physical aggression when young changes as children develop more ‘socially acceptable’ ways to show aggression. As their cognition develop, so do their abilities to demonstrate aggressive behaviour in new ways. |
Describe the overall conclusion of this experiment. |
|
Evaluate the generalisablity using a high and low point. | P - High |
Evaluate the reliability using 2 high points. | P - High |
Evaluate the reliability using 2 low points. | P - Low |
Are there any applications? | P - Yes |
Evaluate the validity using 2 high points. | P - High |
Evaluate the validity using 2 low points. | P - Low |
Evaluate a good and bad ethical issues. | P - Good |