Note to the reader: Please remember that the essay is published work and partial reproduction (5 or more consecutive words) might be considered plagiarism. Universities have systems in place to ensure that the work of their students is original.

The positive psychology approach became influential in the 1990s, when Martin Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (Gable, S. 2007, p. 687), dedicated one issue of the American Psychologist journal to this new approach. In comparison with the previous traditions of psychology, positive psychology shifted the focus from pathology through researching concepts such as happiness, optimism, hope, love, showing how people can become more productive and improve their selves. Using a critical approach to positive psychology and to the way happiness measurements were conducted, the essay will critically discuss whether the government’s endeavour to measure and improve the happiness level has an actual positive impact on the well-being in the population. The essay will show that in trying to provide well-being, the government fails to take into consideration the social context in which people live, for example, it might be very difficult for the underprivileged to take decisions that provide an increased level of happiness. Social inequalities are not only given by belonging to different socio-economic categories, they are also internalised, and they influence individuals’ subjectivity.

Economic science had a strong influence on the development of positive psychology through neoliberal ideology (Stenner, 2017, p. 95, 96) as it emphasised the agentic power of the people, the capacity to take rational changes to improve their own life and achieve well-being. Personal responsibility in being happy was consolidated by research from other social sciences, such as the work done by the economist Richard Easterlin, who assessed that beyond a certain level of income, increased wealth does not make people happier (Stevenson & Wolfers 2008). Although the ‘easterlin paradox’ was open to debate (Stevenson & Wolfers 2008), it nevertheless had a big influence on government policy focussing on providing well-being to increase individuals’ happiness. It might not be easy for people to understand how they are feeling or thinking because their subjectivity might be shaped by what they think that it is expected of them through governance (Stenner, 2017, p. 85). People feel that they need to fit in, and they internalise expectations imposed on them by society. This becomes obvious in the way the work environment changed, as individuals are now expected to bring their personal selves into their work, to behave more like entrepreneurs, to love their jobs and to work flexible hours, while also not having permanent contracts and not knowing what their responsibilities are (Taylor, 2017, a). Neoliberal ideology associates a successful career with happiness, so people internalise and rationalise the demands of their employers. The sense of agency in the working environment is also influenced by gender roles and identities. Women are underrepresented in many professions and they are affected by income inequality (Grown, 2005). While government’s policy makes people responsible for their own happiness, it fails to consider social-economic differences between people that influence individuals’ ability to achieve well-being.

The neoliberal idea that happiness is accessible to all individuals and that improving personal well-being is everyone’s responsibility, does not take into account the social and historical context people live in. According to Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (2012, cited in Taylor, 2017, p. 35), in contemporary society, people can be situated in four different categories: ‘the indebted’- those who are either unemployed or who don’t have enough money, ‘the mediatized’- individuals who are overwhelmed by the use of digital technologies, ‘the securitized’- people who feel that their privacy is threatened by CCTV cameras and other digital recording technologies and finally - ‘the represented’ that is given by the majority of people represented by a small minority. Positive psychology has a humaneering mission, to use scientific methods to improve people’s well-being (Seligman, 1999, p. 560, cited in (Stenner, 2017, p.88, 89), but by doing so, it does not consider different categories of people. For example, the indebted are challenged by learned helplessness. Positive psychology advocates the rationality of human beings and their own personal responsibility to take the best decision, but ‘the mediatized’ individuals are overwhelmed by the diversity of messages sent on different channels of communication. Contrary to what was previously assumed, Daniel Kahneman (2011) demonstrated that individuals are not always capable of taking rational decisions. The optimal choice becomes even more challenging when people’s lives are oversaturated with information. This contradicts the assumptions that individuals are always capable of taking decisions that improve their well-being. Moreover, many people nowadays feel securitised because of the use of digital technologies and CCTV cameras. Tech giants such as Google collects information about consumers that is sold to marketers (Goodman, 2015, p. 84), and most often people don’t know how their personal information is collected and stored. There are some positive instances when the recording of personal information is good, such as the medical history (Taylor, 2017 b, p. 36). On one hand it seems that the use of social platforms has a good influence on well-being because of the access of information and easy communication, it often comes as a trade-off between benefits and costs: the need to use the digital technologies to search for or get a job, to get information and the cost of personal privacy. Finally, the last category, mentioned by Hardt and Negri, the represented sends the idea that most people are led by an elite minority that gets to take decision for the majority of the population. It resonates with policy practices that gives people the responsibility to act as experts in their own lives, for example, to be capable of choosing the best pension plans when they are not provided with any training.

The way people’s happiness is measured raises concerns due to some of the assumptions made as part of the measuring process. One of the premises of well-being measurements is the fact that happiness is an easily quantifiable concept. In fact, people are subjective, and the meaning of happiness differs from one individual to another or even between different cultures (Aik Kwang et al., 2003). The meaning of happiness can be culturally embedded, and some countries are happier than others. The fact that happiness is subjective makes it more difficult to quantify. Yet, happiness measurements use scales and questionnaires, such as choosing on a four levels scale how happy people are: ‘very happy’, ‘quite happy’, ‘not very happy’, ‘not at all happy’ (Stenner, 2017, p. 100). The use of quantitative methods in the study of happiness does not give people the chance to nuance their own lived experiences and to assess their own subjective experience of happiness. Furthermore, the temporal aspect of happiness measurement is not considered: when are people happy? Is it today, this week, this year or generally? (Stenner, 2017, p. 100) Nevertheless, there is evidence that people have the tendency to overestimate their own living conditions, for example, despite traumatic events, 85% of people tend to rate themselves happier than others (Spector, 2012, p. 52). Another challenge in the study of happiness comes from the fact that it is expected that people are capable of analysing their own feelings and thoughts about their own well-being in an objective manner. When answering how happy or satisfied they are with their lives, individuals are supposed to differentiate between how happy they actually feel and what their real living conditions are, therefore, to make a difference between affect and cognition (Stenner, 2017, p. 103).

Finally, the claim that the measurement of happiness enhances people’s wellbeing will be critically evaluated through its practical implications. Is a focus on well-being instead of welfare really beneficial for citizens? Are some categories of people neglected? How is the government implementing happiness programmes and how do they affect different people? According to the easterlin paradox, after achieving a certain level of income, people don’t feel happier with more wealth. As some research suggests, this claim is not supported when the absolute income is considered. A higher GDP per capita is actually associated with increased levels of well-being (Stevenson & Wolfers 2008). While people compare themselves with their peers, their relative income might not cause some individuals to feel that they are particularly happy even if they live comfortable lives. Although, when absolute income is taken into account, more wealth does make everyone happier, even if the citizens are not necessarily very aware of it. Therefore, the government’s responsibility should be first of all to focus on welfare and not well-being. The capacity to benefit from the well-being policies is not equal for all citizens. According to Hardt and Negri’s categories of people, most individuals are represented and there’s only a minority elite. Most often, people don’t have enough knowledge or time to take the best decisions in their lives. It also takes the pressure away from the government in providing welfare and it puts the responsibility on the individuals (University, a, 2018). Some of the government’s practices regarding providing well-being to the people can be seen as rather disturbing as Paul Stenner gives the example of some people who were left unemployed were offered happiness training instead of welfare (University, b, 2018).

The essay showed the limited role the measurement of happiness has in the well-being of the population. An elite minority with financial resources can benefit from the new findings offered by the positive psychology. The ‘represented’ or the ‘indebted’ don’t have the expert knowledge to optimise their lives. One problem with the implementation of positive psychology principles arises from the government’s failure to consider the social context people live in, the social-economic stratification, the challenges in a methodological approach to study happiness and the cultural embedding of happiness. Another concern with the government’s aim to use positive psychology to improve well-being is the fact that it fits into a neoliberal ideology that absolves the government of the responsibility to provide welfare, while individuals are wrongly assumed to be rational actors who are always capable to take optimal decisions.

Year 3 Essay 3: Does measuring happiness increases well-being

In recent years, there has been a growing climate conscious approach that feeds into the anxiety of changing natural habitats. A brief search of literature using the words ‘nature and well-being’ finds research that covers a wide variety of subjects such as geography, urban design, sociology and psychology. The aim of this literature review is to present key concepts, theories and methods that shaped the psychological research about nature and well-being. The structure will include subsections presenting ‘Classic Studies’, ‘Recent research’ and ‘Considerations for a phenomenological approach’. Although there is a wide consensus that nature is important to the quality of life, there are only a few phenomenological studies that investigate how people experience well-being through nature, by exploring the subjective experience without the purpose of producing generalisations to the entire population.

One of the dominant approaches in understanding the importance of nature in the well-beings of individuals is the evolutionary perspective which states that people prefer a natural environment because of millions of years of evolution (Stevens, 2015, p. 329). Research showed that regardless of cultural background, individuals chose natural scenes over urban environments (Purcell et al., 1994, cited in Stevens, 2015, p. 331). Also, individuals showed a preference over savannah type landscape as opposed to a forest landscape (Falk and Balling, 2010, cited in Stevens, 2015, p. 337), because, according to an evolutionary perspective, early humans lived in Africa and savannah was the natural habitat. Although the findings regarding savannah type landscape preferences are reliable, the main criticism is that they are still based on assumptions. It is difficult to prove that nature preferences remain stable after hundreds or thousands of generations. Alternative explanations are possible, maybe people prefer savannah landscapes because they look sunnier or maybe exploring and enjoying a savannah type landscape seems easier.

Another influential approach was to research how natural environments can bring the levels of optimum functioning quicker than other type of built setting. Ulrich also explained people’s preferences for natural habitats through ‘psychoevolutionary theory’, that states that individuals find nature restorative because this is the environment where humans evolved (1991, cited in Stevens, 2015).For example, in an experiment, Ulrich and colleagues (1991, cited in Stevens, 2015, p. 342) required participants to view a stressful video, followed by another video that depicted a natural scene or a built environment without natural elements. Physiological indicators for stress (heart rate, blood pressure and muscle tension) were recorded. The findings showed that participants who viewed the nature video reported more positive feelings than the ones who watched the built environment. The only criticism to this study is that the experiment had low ecological validity and perhaps the nature measure was not actually a nature experience, since the participants did not actually experience nature, but ‘technological nature’.

Other theorists also tried to understand what makes natural experiences restorative. For example, in ART theory, Rachel and Steven Kaplan (1989, cited in Stevens, 2015, p. 345), identified four qualities of the environment that helps individual to have optimum level of concentration and overcome attentional fatigue. They found that people prefer elements of natural environments, such as trees, vegetation and water, over built settings (Kaplan & Kaplan, cited in Kahn et al. 2009, p.37).The four ART components are: ‘fascination’, ‘being away’, ‘extent’-how natural elements go together and ‘compatibility’- the environment provides opportunities for enjoying activities. ART theory was applied in the development of psychological scales such as the Perceived Restorativeness Scale (Hartig et. al., 1997, cited in Stevens, 2015).

Recent research in the well-being experience in nature also favours experiments and quantitative research. For example, starting from Kaplan & Kaplan, (cited in Kahn et al. 2009, p.37) findings that people prefer natural elements, Kahn et al. (2009) conducted an experiment to investigate how individuals perceive technological nature. In an experiment, Kahn et al. (2008) recorded physiological measures to see how participants respond to nature seen through a glass window, the same nature environment seen thorough plasma TV that depicted the natural scene in real time, and no nature watching at all. The findings were that people prefer to watch nature through a window, but technological nature (plasma TV) is still better than no nature at all. In a more recent study, Soga et al. (2016) inquired how individuals experience neighbourhood nature, and they found that people value neighbourhood natural environments, butterflies and birds. A four-page questionnaire was administered to investigate nature perspective. One of the interesting findings of the study was that nature experience correlated positively with valuing neighbourhood nature (Soga et al., 2016, p. 148), meaning that the well-being felt through nature experience may increase with more exposure to nature.

For some authors such as Passmore and Howell (2014), nature experience is fundamental in well-being. The perspective promoted is one of Eco-existential positive Psychology, where nature plays an important role in dealing with six existential anxieties linked to: identity, meaning of life, death, freedom, isolation and happiness. Passmore and Howell make a literature review in support for their theoretical assumption. For example, they refer to Ernest Berger (1973, cited in Passmore & Howell, 2014, p. 381), and his findings that the fear of death is dealt through connection with nature. The awareness that human existence is embodied in nature transcends the here and now.

The theoretical assumption promoted by Passmore and Howell (2014) that the natural world is experienced as embodied was supported by one piece of qualitative research, that combined a phenomenological approach with psychoanalytic theory (Kahn, et al. 2009). For example, one participant, Hannah, 28 years old, observed that the nature experience is ‘a complete sense of belonging. (…) Sort of like a cellular return. It kind of feels that my cells are returned to themselves, reminded of their beautiful simplicity within the context of the complexity of the whole’ (Kahn et al. 2009).

Considerations for phenomenological research

So far, the psychological literature regarding nature and well-being used as preferred methods study quantitative data- scales and experiments. There was a lack of focus on the subjective experience of nature through a phenomenological approach, trying to understand how people experience nature, gathering rich data and finding how nature is important for well-being. While the findings about the relationship with nature obtained through the use of scales and experiments are very useful, the criticism is that they are based on taken for granted assumptions about the nature experience, without actually knowing why or how people experience well-being in nature. Also, rather than being interested in generalisations, it might be worth to try to understand how people have different subjective experiences. The purpose of the phenomenological research is to understand the experience and to depict its rich detail (Langdridge, 2016).

The research question is: How do people experience well-being through nature? Rather than starting from previous theories, the research question is about the experience itself, a ‘bottom-up’ approach starting from the data. The focus is on the lived experience of the participants.

So far, psychology tried to explain the connection with nature through an evolutionary perspective and by focusing on the restorative qualities of natural elements. Although worthy and widely supported by empirical studies, these approaches fail to consider people’s personal experiences. There are also methodological considerations, low ecological validity in the experiments and construct validity: arguably a picture depicting nature is not a nature experience. Also, the use of scales in measuring well-being experience in nature can be problematic for different reasons: it requires individuals to assign numbers to subjective experiences and the responses can be influenced by social desirability. The advantage of a phenomenological approach to study the well-being experience in nature is that it aims to provide a rich description of the subjective personal experience in nature, without the need to be influenced by existing theories.

Year 3 Essay 5: The experience of well-being in nature: a phenomenological approach

The purpose of social psychology is to study human interactions and the effect they have on individuals. The way people make sense of the world and themselves and the way they behave is mediated by the connections, real and symbolic that they have with other individuals (Colman, 2008, p. 706, 709). However, some disciplines in the social sciences, particularly economics and politics take a different approach by describing people as monads, rational beings capable of taking optimal decisions on their own and to improve their overall well-being. Using a wide range of methods, such as qualitative ethological, narrative techniques, interviews and experiments, the researchers in social psychology outlined the limitations of the economic approach regarding human nature. 

One concept that was particularly influential in economics and political science in the 1980s and 1990s in western economies was neoliberalism. It promotes individual freedom ‘laissez-faire’, while the state is regarded as “coercive” (Scott & Marshall 1999 p.510). The famous quote by Margaret Thatcher (1987) - ‘there’s no such thing as society’ captures the essence of neoliberalism, as people are seen as individuals, isolated from each other, while having a sense of agency and a personal responsibility to take care of their selves. Twenty-one years following Thatcher’s speech, the global economic crisis (2008-2009) challenged the ideology of neoliberalism (Steger & Roy, 2010). However, even before the financial crash, social psychologists took a critical approach of the economic ideology, because it failed to consider the imbalance in power relationships between capitalists and workers. For example, Valerie Walkerdine (2003, p. 240) offers the example of a very competent secretary who was already working long hours but despite her dedication, the managers were still giving her more tasks. What draws attention about this case is the woman’s discourse: she failed to see that she was exploited, but instead she was feeling she was just not good enough. The analysis of workers’ narratives shows that people are influenced by what they think is expected of them by society. Often, the employees are not aware when they are taken advantage of and as a result, they lack the agency to improve their situation. The neoliberal discourse acts in a normative way, constraining individuals to achieve the standards imposed by the capitalists.

According to social psychology, people are not monads - rational actors capable of accurately making sense of the world they live in (Taylor, 2017, p. 41). Research in behavioural economics (Kahneman 2011, Thaler 2015), demonstrates that while taking decisions, individuals are affected by cognitive biases. For example, people would rather avert a loss than obtain a gain. Moreover, as shown by the cases described by Walkerdine (2003), people are subjective. The emotions emerge in the social relationships with other people (Jackson, 1993, p. 207, cited in Burkitt, 1999). Not being middle class and not being able to participate in consumption makes people feel inadequate. Walkerdine (2003, p. 245, 246) makes reference to Lisa, a woman who wants to make a name for herself, to drive a nice car and who describes herself using categories of social status: working class/middle class, being successful. The culture people live in shapes people’s sense of self (The Open University, 2018, a). The qualitative analysis done by Walkerdine illustrates that people of modest means feel worthy if they manage to become middle class. The neoliberal discourse pathologizes individuals who fail to achieve financial success. In doing so, neoliberalism does not consider inequalities determined by income, class, ethnicity and education.

So far, the essay showed that people’s identity is shaped by the society they live in. The culture acts in a normative way by prescribing desirable attitudes and behaviours such as consumerism, hard work, responsibility for your own well-being. Paul Stenner (2018, b) describes how after the 1990s positive psychology was used to improve the welfare of individuals. Stenner gave the “quite upsetting” example of when people who were unemployed were offered well-being training. While positive psychology and nudge theory seem to act in a way to help people to optimise their lives, there are concerns with the fairness and ethics of using behavioural interventions as an alternative to actually provide the necessary help to ensure peoples’ well-being.

Still, over the last decades, inequality between the rich and the poor increased (Taylor 2017). Hardt and Negri (2012, p.10) cited in Taylor et al. (2017, p. 35) argue that based on the income, people can be ‘indebted’ - individuals who just take on more debt to cover expenses or ‘represented’ - wealthy, powerful individuals, leaders. Research (Tricomi, et al., 2010) found that there is “neural evidence” that individuals are inequality averse. While people are constrained by the demands of society, they are also motivated to increase their welfare (Choshen - Hillel & Yaniv, 2011). This fact leads to the question - Do people have one single stable identity? Gergen (1991, p.71) cited in Taylor (2017) argues that nowadays, people have multiple identities or are multiphrenic because of the different messages, sometimes opposing, in the environment. This allows people to have a sense of identity and to act towards improving their well-being. For example, while society can promote a certain body image, women also have the choice to think in a healthy way about their own bodies. Agency explains social change and how individuals try to shape the society they live in to create a fairer society. Holzkamp (1983) cited in Motzkau and Taylor (2017, p. 73) underlines that people have a social nature and therefore they participate to improve their living conditions. Unlike some of the social psychologists who emphasise the influence of society on the individual, Holzkamp takes a critical approach by doing research “from the standpoint of the subject” (Motzkau and Taylor, 2017, p. 73)

This essay showed that the relationship between the individual and society is complex and dynamic. Qualitative research outlines how a person’s identity is influenced by the culture in which she or he lives, for example, the neoliberal ideology that acts in a normative way promoting consumerism, hard work and personal responsibility. Positive psychology and nudge theory are used by the government and the elites to model the behaviour of people. However, there is neural evidence that people are averse to social inequality and there are is the anthropological argument that individuals worked together to improve their living conditions. Therefore, people are not just passive recipients of the messages received from the society they live in, but they also act in a way to change the world in a way that is fairer.

Year 3 Essay 1: Social - Individual Interface

Starting with the 1970’s the western world changed under the influence of neoliberalism that led to new waves of migration and globalisation (Delgado & Marquez 2013). As a result, people from different cultural backgrounds, such as religion, ethnicity and nationality, experienced intercultural encounters, living together in a certain geographical space (Glaveanu & Jovchelovitch 2017). The concept of culture incorporates physical elements, ways of thinking, habits, attitudes, myths and values shared by a certain group (Moodley & Curling 2006). More broadly, the term of intercultural encounters can be applied to people who belong to different groups, determined by the meaningful identity the members of the group share. One prevalent idea is that social conflict arises in ‘any relationship and any social interaction between individuals and groups’ (De Dreu, 2007). The aim of the essay is to discuss whether the conflict is inevitable for the intercultural encounters by looking at the cause of different types of conflict as well as identifying instances where conflict is missing or when the meeting between intercultural encounters can have positive results.

In social psychology there are different approaches in the study of the concept of culture, such as multiculturalism and assimilation. There is not one unitary idea regarding what is the source of conflict between different groups and how it can be solved. Even the way the culture of different groups was studied was very different across time and sometimes the research led to very different results. In multiculturalism, the source of conflict between people of different groups is conditioned by the recognition/negation of their identity by the society in which they live. Tariq Modood, a Professor of Sociology from the University of Bristol, considers that some identities are very important for members of certain groups. For example, when asked to describe themselves, one of the very first things Muslim people would say is that they are Muslims (University, 2017, a). Multiculturalism emphasises that it is essential that social identities are recognised (Phoenix, 2017, p. 192). According to the perspective of multiculturalism, the conflict does not arise because of the differences between people, but rather because the differences are not recognised. Therefore, multiculturalism becomes a political idea, taking a normative approach through trying to influence the laws and policies to accept the diversity of practices of the ethnic minorities.For example, Professor Tariq Modood (2017, a) offers the example when the law had to be changed in UK to allow the Sikhs to ride a motorcycle without wearing a helmet. Because of their religion, the Sikhs cannot cut their hair, and this constitutes an impediment in wearing a helmet. Tariq Modood emphasises that to be treated equally is not the same thing as to be fair. Sometimes, the law has to enable and empower people even if this means allowing Sikhs to ride a motorcycle without wearing a helmet. Different countries have different approaches to dealing with cultural diversity.

A concept that opposes multiculturalism is the one of assimilation, that consists of supporting and encouraging individuals of different ethnicities to adopt the customs and traditions of the mainstream society (2017, a). In doing so, the society does not accept the needs of the minority. For example, an article in the Guardian: “Pork or nothing: how schools’ dinners are dividing France (2017, p. 206) illustrates how a change in the menu in the French school to include mostly pork meals does not leave much choice for the Muslim children. The two examples in policy in UK and France illustrate the fact that conflict between intercultural encounters emerges only when the needs of the minorities are not recognised. An in-group-outgroup thinking underlines the principle of assimilation. In this context, in the French society, the Muslims are seen as an outgroup. Treating members of a minority group badly is morally wrong. Though, the conflict between intercultural encounters is not necessarily inevitable. The research suggests that there are two strategies that can be put into place: ‘recategorisation’, ‘decategorisation and personalisation’ (Hadarics & Kende, 2018). Through ‘recategorisation’ the Muslim children can be seen not through their ethnic identity, but as students in a certain institution, and through ‘personalisation’ the French policy makers can neglect the group membership and they can emphasise individual well-being.

A different theoretical approach in the study of the interaction between people from different cultural backgrounds is offered by the ‘living multicultures’ project led by Sarah Neal, of the University of Surrey. The aim of this research was to study the ‘convivial’ everyday interactions of people from urban areas in order to show that people of different ethnicity and cultural background do mix with each other. The study (Neal, Bennett, Cochrane, & Mohan 2013) used a range of qualitative methods: interviews, focus groups, and the researchers addressed questions about people’s lives, their personal histories and the places they live in and how they relate to those places (The Open University, 2017, b). In order to find out how geography has an influence on people’s attitudes and behaviours towards individuals of different ethnicity, three different geographical areas in the UK were selected: Hackney, Milton Keynes and Oadby. These three places are different in terms of experience with multiculturalism and wealth. Hackney is characterised by ‘super-diversity’, where the white British people are ‘in a minority’, Milton Keynes is ‘fairly affluent’ and it has recent experience with multiculturalism and Oadby in Leicestershire has multigenerational migrants who experienced upward mobility. The findings of the ‘living multicultures’ project was that despite some cases when individuals expressed racism, people of different ethnicity and culture mix with each other and ‘sometimes there is celebration of difference’ (The Open University, 2017, b). The research led by Sarah Neal shows that conflict is not necessarily an important aspect in the intercultural encounters. People have also an identity linked to the place where they belong, in Oadby individuals were more concerned with their middle-class status rather than their ethnic identity. People form meaningful relationships if they work together, despite their cultural differences, as there is the case of the writing group in Hackney. 2018) Also, in Hackney, people had ‘multicultural competences and skills’ and they were capable of reflecting about different cultures. (The Open University, 2017, b). This finding is supported by research that shows that members from groups that are culturally heterogeneous have higher cultural intelligence than member of homogenous groups (Fang, Schei, & Selart 2018). The ‘living multicultures’ project offers a different perspective from multiculturalism as it is not concerned to study the differences between people from different backgrounds, but rather, to bring to light the subjective meaning individuals attribute to living in a multicultural society.

Another theoretical perspective that explores the conflict between the intercultural encounters is the sociocultural approach. As a result of globalisation, in the UK people come in contact with different cultures that can ‘challenge’ the ‘natural, permanent and inevitable’ nature of our own cultural beliefs and practices’ (Asch, 1987, p. 7, cited in Andreouli & Sammut 2017, p. 154). The ‘collective representations’ (Durkheim, 1989, cited in Andreouli & Sammut 2017, p. 154) become social representations, as people stop taking for granted their knowledge about the world they live in. The concept of ‘collective representations’ is based on tradition, when a long-established way of thinking or doing things is not questioned. Though, nowadays people come in contact with others from different cultural backgrounds and they use ‘social representations’ (Moscovici, 1984, cited in Andreouli & Sammut 2017, p. 159) to make sense of the world they live in. Social representations are characterised by a ‘plurality’ of views about the world. While sometimes this is a source of conflict, other times it can be beneficial. For example, people in UK find out that the life expectancy of the Spanish people is higher, and they attribute this to the Mediterranean diet. Adopting a different diet can be seen as a change from the traditional British meal but this does not mean that there is necessarily a conflict.Cognitive poliphasia is the process when members of one group borrow ideas and beliefs from a different group (Jovchelovitch, & Priego-Hernandez, 2015). For example, in the treatment of diabetes, people in Ghana use different practices, scientific and religious ones in the same time. (Jovchelovitch, & Priego-Hernandez, 2015, p. 169) and it allows different representations to coexist.

The essay illustrated that while conflict is a part of the interaction between people from different cultural backgrounds, sometimes the conflict can be changed. Multiculturalism is offered as a solution for conflict in the acceptance of the identity of minorities. The acceptance does not always need to ensure equality, but it needs to ensure fairness, as members of different religions have distinctive needs. The assimilation approach provides equality for the members of different group, but it might not represent the right of certain minorities. The ‘living multicultures’ research suggests that in their everyday life people perceive the ethnic and cultural differences as ordinary. Finally, the sociocultural approach emphasises that people nowadays have different social representations about the world that are not traditional and fixed. While this can sometimes be a source of conflict, meeting other cultures can create optimisation.

Year 3 Essay 2: Social Psychology - Cultural Conflict

Public involvement in the health-care decisions making

A Social Psychological Report about the NHS Protests in March 2017

Abstract

The aim of the report is to analyse the protests of 2017 in favour of the NHS from a social psychology perspective. BBC articles were used to analyse the demonstrator’s discourse through the prism of a couple of theories of participation in protest, such as social identity theory, relative deprivation theory, resource mobilisation theory. The findings are that protesters share an identity of good citizens and they think that political action is their duty. The recommendation is to deal with the demonstrators in a way in which their needs are met, otherwise it is very likely for the protests in favour of the NHS to keep reoccurring or to amplify.


1. Introduction

1.1.	The aims of the report

This report provides a social psychology perspective on the protests of March 2017 in favour of the NHS. The purpose of this research is to provide an understanding of the identity of the protesters that gathered in London on the 4 March 2017, their motivations to participate and their goals.

1.2.	The social psychology perspective on protests

Although protests can be seen as disruptive, sometimes the demonstrators think that participating in a protest is a duty to defend their rights as citizens (University, 2017). A part of the school curriculum in England is to teach young people that participating in political action is a responsibility (Clarke, 2005, cited in Andreouli & Manning, 2017, p. 253). The research in social psychology regarding protests offers insights into protest participation, answering to question such as who are the demonstrators? What motivates people to participate?
The people who protested in favour of the NHS come from different backgrounds and at first glance it might seem that it is a heterogeneous crowd from all over the UK of different education, age and nationality. Social psychology research shows that individuals’ identity is influenced by the situation they are in (van Zomeren, 2017, p. 282). In the context of the NHS protests, people’s identity as citizens became dominant, as the protesters view themselves as good citizens protecting the NHS. Public participation is seen as a good thing (Cornwall, 2008, cited in Gary & Manning, 2017, p. 316)
Based on empirical research, social psychologists developed theories that help understand the protests, for example
•	social identity theory (Van Zomeran, 2017) explains that in order for the protests to take place members of the group need to share a common identity and their position needs to be 1. “unstable”, 2. “illegitimate” and 3. “impermeable” (Van Zomeran, 2017, p. 283) (for a detailed explanation and examples see Findings, p. 4).
•	relative deprivation theory emphasises that participation in protests arises from the subjective feeling of injustice people feel (Van Zomeran, 2017)
•	resource mobilisation theory shows that demonstrators are rational actors who do a cost-benefit analysis before participating to protest. The resources are not only tangible ones, such as money or time, but also moral and cultural resources (Edwards, 2008, p. 786)
•	and, social identity model of collective action (SIMCA), (University, 2017, b) offers a model that integrates elements of the social identity theory and relative deprivation theory.


2. Methodology

The present report uses social psychology theory and research to analyse the discourse of the protesters in favour of the NHS as presented by the BBC.

3. Findings

3.1. The identity of the protesters

In order to understand the protests in favour of the NHS it is useful to know who are the demonstrators and what brought them together in Tavistock Square on the 4 March 2017. Social psychology explains that people object to perceived “group-based injustice” (Hogg, 2007). According to the BBC (2017, a) people of different backgrounds took part in the demonstration: nurses, doctors, a teacher, a writer, politicians. Even if the protesters are individuals of diverse ethnicity, age, education, they see themselves as members of the same group - citizens who benefited from the NHS, which is, according to a demonstrator “the greatest gift the people of this country have created” (BBC, 2013, a). The social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner (1979), cited in Van Zomeren, 2017, p. 281) proposes that members of one group take political action when their position is 1. “unstable”, 2. “illegitimate” and 3. “impermeable” (Van Zomeran, 2017, p. 283) - meaning that the only way people can improve their situation is if they act together as a group.

•	The unstable situation of the NHS emerges from “potentially radical changes” due to take place at the end of March (Pym, 2017). New legislation regarding sustainability and transformation plans (STPs) (Pym, 2016) could lead to hospital cuts, forcing some patients to be treated at home. The NHS would be split into 44 areas that would self-manage their finances and £22bn would be saved over the course of 5 years.

•	The feeling that the new legislation regarding the NHS is perceived by the protesters as illegitimate. People consider that the NHS is a public institution. Big signs the demonstrators carry say “People before profit. Save our NHS” (BBC, 2017, a). Also, on social media demonstrators argue that Tories are “destroying the greatest gift the people of this country have created”. Therefore, the British citizens consider that the NHS should serve the interest of people and it should be free from privatisation and cuts.

•	The protesters in favour of the NHS see the politicians as an out-group that is “impermeable” and they feel that a change in legislation for the better can be done only if they join forces together. People consider that “It is not the fault of the staff. It is the fault of a government who made a political choice” (BBC, 2017, a).

3.2. Protest participation

The ‘hospital cuts’ represent a threat for all the people of the UK who benefitted or might benefit from treatment in the NHS. Two social psychology theories are very useful in explaining protest participation: 1. relative deprivation theory (RDT) and 2. resource mobilisation theory (RMT) (Van Zomeren, 2017, p. 278, 280).
•	According to the RDT, people engage in protest when they feel treated unfairly. In the case of the NHS protests, demonstrators compare their new rights as NHS patients with how this public institution used to be in the past and now, they feel worse off and that NHS services “are on their knees” (BBC, 2017, a). As the theory suggests, people’s feelings do not always need to be rational or right. It is the perception of feeling deprived that motivates people to participate.
•	The RMT focuses on the factors that motivate people to protest. RMT considers that individuals are rational in their decision to take political action, they analyse the costs and benefits, and they protest if they think that their actions are effective. It is noteworthy that in the protests for the NHS there were 150 coaches, bringing people from all over UK (BBC, 2017, a). The fact that so many people came together in support of the NHS demonstrate how important it is for people to stop the new legislation regarding further cuts to public health. The resources are not only physical or tangible ones, but also moral and cultural. People know the history of the NHS and what it represents in the UK.

3.3. The goals and objectives of the demonstrators

The reasons why people took part in the protests are personal, but they all have the same objective - “to make a difference” and “to make their voices heard”. Young people also think they “can make a change”. One woman is an immigrant and a nurse. She worked in a different health system before and she knows that if people have to pay for health and they do not afford, they die. The reason why she takes part in the protest is because she does not want the NHS to become a health system where people have to pay for their care. Regardless of their personal histories with the NHS the common goal of the protesters is to protect the NHS from privatisation and to keep it accessible to everybody. The people see “collective action” as the means to accomplish their goals. They hope that “one million people can make a difference”. The social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) (University, b) is a theory in social psychology that predicts that people protest when they feel a perceived injustice, when they have a strong feeling of group identity and when they think that their actions will lead to good results.

4. Conclusions

•	The protesters in favour of the NHS might be seen as disobedient and disruptive, but they participate in good faith, thinking that it is their duty to take political action.
•	The participants come from different background in terms of education, age, gender and nationality but they are united by their identity as good citizens. The feeling of injustice is dominant, and the demonstrators feel that they have to protect the NHS from the new legislation that threatens to change it for the worse.
•	The people involved in the protests feel they can be effective as a group, and their numbers can give them the power to support the NHS.

5. Recommendations
•	It is very likely for the protests in favour of the NHS to keep reoccurring or to amplify if the needs of the people are not met. According to social psychology research people see it as their duty to protest when governments take decisions that are seen as illegitimate and unjust.

(1628 words)

Year 3 Report: Public involvement in the health-care decisions making, A Social Psychological Report about the NHS Protests in March 2017

The report does not include the table of contents, consent form, the debrief form and the SPSS files.

The Effect of Different Categories of Change on Change Blindness

Change blindness is the failure to notice when a change is made to a scene. Using the flicker paradigm, the present report tried to determine that the average response time to detect a change varies significantly depending on the type of change made. An opportunity sample of 250 individuals (180 females and 70 males) took part in a within participants design experiment. There were three experimental conditions characterised by the type of change made to a scene: an object was replaced by an item from the same category, from a congruent category and from an incongruent category. In the control condition no change was made. The results of the experiment did not find a significant difference in the average response time to detect a change in all three categories. Also, differently from what was predicted, the average response to detect a change was fastest in the congruent-change category and slowest in the incongruent change category. The use of more control measures for the object changed in each scene (such as colour, shape and location), and for the types of the scenes (complex, less complex) as well as for the demographic characteristics of the participants (equal number of males and females) could lead to more significant results.

The new research in cognitive psychology challenged the pre-existing belief that humans have an accurate and objective representation of the physical qualities of the environment. The discrepancy between the way the surroundings are perceived through the anatomical structures of the eye and the mental representation of the environment was studied using the concept of ‘change blindness’, explained as the failure to identify that a change is made to a scene (Briggs & Davies, 2015). Also, even when people are able to detect the change, central elements are easier to notice than marginal ones. Using the ‘flicker paradigm’, Rensink et al. (1997), cited in Briggs & Davies (2015) made an experiment where a blank was introduced between an alternation of a scene and a modified scene. On average, participants needed 5 seconds to find a central change in the scene and 11 seconds to observe a marginal change. Similar conclusions were reached by O’ Regan et al. (1999), cited in Briggs & Davies (2015).

Moreover, the phenomenon of ‘change blindness’ was also supported by experiments with high ecological validity. In an experiment conducted by Simons and Levin (1998) cited in Briggs & Davies (2015) 47% of people failed to notice that someone asking for directions is replaced by one of two people who are transporting a door. When students were asked for directions by a person dressed as a construction worker, those noticing a change of persons dropped to 33% and the explanation is that the students payed less attention to the workers because they belonged to a different social group. This shows that the quality of attention is important to detect when a change is made in an environment.

Other factors might predict change blindness. In one study, Miyamoto et al. (2006) cited in the University (2018, b) used an experiment to demonstrate that the attention can be even influenced by the cultural environment. Participants, either Japanese or Americans, who were first exposed to Japanese scenes (considered to be more complex) as opposed to American environments, were better at detecting changes made to a scene. Therefore, individual characteristics can influence the capacity to detect a change in a scene.

The current study investigates whether the average response time needed to detect a change in a scene can be determined by the type of change made. The changes are from the same category (within-category change), from a similar category (congruent change) and from an incongruent change. The change blindness research showed that the ability to notice a change is influenced by how salient objects are, as a central change is easier to detect that a marginal one. The reasoning behind the present experiment is that objects can be more or less salient, depending on which category they belong to. As a result, a significant difference between the average response time to detect a change between the three categories, with the fastest response time for the incongruent change category, followed by congruent change category and lastly, within category change is expected.

The design is a within participants experiment that researched how different types of changes made to a scene (independent variable) determined different reaction times to detect that a change was produced (dependent variable). The independent variable has three conditions: 1) congruent change, 2) incongruent change, 3) within category change. The dependent variable is measured as the mean reaction time to detect a change for each of the 3 categories. To control that the participants correctly identify when a change takes place within a specific category, a quarter of the 16 everyday scenes don’t present any change. In this way the data of the people who frequently detect a change in the no-change trials can be removed before the analysis.

250 People took part in the experiment, with ages between 18 and 78. Over two thirds (180 out of 250) of the participants were females and just under a third of the participants (70 out of 250) were males. The average age was 37.1 years (with a standard deviation of 12.483) and half of the those who took part in the experiment were younger than 34 and a half years. Only 7 participants were over 60 years old. Every participant gave informed consent. The sampling was random, but the participants confirmed they had normal eyesight and that they were not psychology students of the DE200 course.

The experiment was conducted in a laboratory that was equipped with a desk, a chair and a computer with internet access. The experiment was accessed using the module (University, 2017 a). The instructions before the experiment started, the consent form and the debrief were included in the data file with the running experiment. Also, for convenience, the assistant had separate forms for experiment instructions, consent and debrief. Every participant took part in the experiment individually. The stimuli were randomly presented on the computer screen and they consisted of 16 experimental trials depicting everyday scenes. Each trial in the experimental conditions consists of two very similar images presented one after the other with a blank screen in the middle. The blank screen and the images appear as flickering on the computer screen for 0.25 seconds each. When the participants identify that there is a change between the two images, they click the image and the time taken to identify the change is recorded.

There are three types of changes made to the scene: ‘within-category change’- when an object is changed with one from the same category (when a phone is replaced by a stapler), ‘congruent change’- when the object is not from the same category, but fits in the context (a phone is replaced by a banana), and ‘incongruent change’ when the object is replaced with one that does not match in the context (a plate is changed with a watering can). The three types of changes appear four times each, in random order. The control condition consists of 4 trials and is similar with the experimental condition only that the images that flicker after each other are identical. The purpose of the control condition is to allow the researchers to remove the answers of the participants who consistently identify a change.

Every participant was tested individually and before the experiment began, he/she was told that he/she could withdraw at any time. Also, every participant was asked to confirm that he/she had normal eyesight and in the case of having photosensitive epilepsy, the participant was warned to not take part in the experiment. After that, the purpose of the experiment was explained. Before the experiment started, the age and gender, as well as the consent to take part in the experiment were recorded in the date file containing the running experiment and also on the forms provided by the assistant. Also, the participant had the opportunity to see three examples with the requirements of the experiment. After that, the participant took part in the 12 trials in the experimental conditions and in the 4 trials in the control condition. Each trial contained everyday scenes that were slightly different in the experimental condition and identical in the control condition. The participants saw the trials in random order, and they had up to 20 seconds to click on the image if the trial depicted a change in the scene. After watching the 16 trials, the participants had to submit their responses. In the debrief form, the participant was thanked for the time he/she took to complete the experiment and was reassured by being told that around 30% of people fail to notice changes in similar trials.

On average, the 250 participants’ response time was fastest for the ‘congruent changes category’ (mean= 4.29, SD=1,39), followed by ‘within category changes’ (mean=5.13, SD=2.00) and lastly, the slowest response time was for the ‘incongruent changes category (mean= 5.34, SD= 1.98)

The one-way repeated measures ANOVA determined that the effect of the type of change made to a scene (IV) on the mean reaction time to notice that a change was made (DV) was statistically significant (F (1.78, 444) =33, 84, p<0.001, np2 = 0.12) Partial eta squared (np2) measures the effect size. np2 = 0.12 which means that the independent variable (the type of change made to a scene) has a medium effect on the dependent variable (the mean reaction time to notice the type of change). Mauchly’s test of sphericity is statistically significant meaning that the condition of sphericity has not been met because p<0.005 χ2 (2) =0.88, p=0.00. To correct the sphericity the Greenhouse-Geisser estimate was used. The mean difference is statistically significant (Sig.b < 0.001) between congruent change made category (1) and within category change made category (3) and also between congruent change made category (1) and incongruent change made category (3). However, the mean difference is not statistically significant (Sig.b = 0.51) between incongruent change category (2) and within category change (3). The findings do not support the hypothesis that there is a statistical difference between the mean response times to identify a change in the three categories. Also, contrary to the hypothesis, the results show that the average response time for the congruent changes is fastest for the within-category changes and it is the slowest in the case of incongruent changes category.

The purpose of this study was to research how change blindness affects people depending on different types of changes made to a scene. Data analysis did not support the hypothesis and contrary to what was expected the response time to identify that a change was made to a scene was slowest in the case of incongruent change and fastest for the congruent-change category. The outcome is surprising considering that the items that replaced other objects in the incongruent change category were more salient, for example in one of the paired scenes, a white pillow is replaced by a white bin.

The result could partially be explained by the lack of controls for the shape, colour and place of the objects chosen for the three experimental conditions.For example, in the within category change, the objects are changed by items from the same category: a mug with striped design is changed with another mug with three big dots. Of course, both mugs belong to the same category, but arguably, the three big dots draw attention and it makes it easier for the participant to identify a change. Moreover, in the present study, the objects changed are randomly positioned in the centre or more marginally in the scene. Previous research, (Rensink et al. (1997), cited in Briggs & Davies (2015) and O’ Regan et al. (1999), cited in Briggs & Davies (2015) demonstrated that central changes are easier to detect than marginal ones. Thence, the salience of an object from the within-category change (most difficult to detect), is increased if the object is placed in the centre of the scene.

Another problem might have arisen from the degree of complexity of the scenes, as some of the images included in the experiment contained more details than others. In the study of change blindness, Miyamoto et al. (2006) cited in the Open University (2018, b) used images with different degree of complexity (Japanese vs American environments) to assess that the cultural environment has an effect on change blindness. Although all the images in the experiment are everyday scenes depicting places in an office, bedroom or kitchen, some of the images included in the present study contain more elements than others and this can have an influence on the speed of identifying a change in the three categories.

The current study could be improved by using controls for the colour, shape and location of the objects changed in each scene. Also, it could be useful to control variables such as age and gender. Less than a third of the participants included in the experiments were males and the evidence (Cassimjee & Maree, 2004) suggests that males and females are differently affected by change blindness (including changes in colour and location of an item).

Even if the current study failed to achieve significant results, it indicates that the quality of an object to belong to a certain category is not enough to obtain a significant result in the average response time to detect a change in different categories of change. A replication of the experiment using more control measures could lead to different results. Still, there is no certainty in the way cognitive processes other than perception, attention and memory can facilitate object detection in change blindness. For example, one study (Porubanova-Norquist & Sikl, 2013) suggests that participants have different expectations about the location of the change depending on the elements that attract attention in a scene and in order to optimise the detection, they use a heuristic approach.

Total word count (without the abstract): 2175 words

Year 2 Quantitative Report: The Effect of Different Categories of Change on Change Blindness

Essays plans are far from perfect. This is an example of an essay plan that does not follow PESEL (Point, Explain, Support Evidence, Link)very well. It does however contain good reference to theory, research and applications.



What is altruism
What the theories are about?
What kind of evidence will be used?
Do people really help selflessly?





1. Kate Genovese (context)
2. What kind of approach is that what is the bystander effect?
3. Types of evidence: the reproduction of different experiments
4. Applications of the research- how effective the research is
5. How valid the research is? Motivations for helping selflessly,



1. Piliavin et el.
2. Instead of asking why people don’t help, we should ask why people help
3. The arousal response (emotional component/ defence reaction)
4. CCTV cameras (night-time economy behaviour)
5. The effect of the number of bystanders over the outcome of an aggression
6. What is the validity of something like this?
7. What is the effectiveness?
8. What are the applications to real life situations: ex: advice given to the police





1. People do help depending on the group to which they belong
2. What are the research in this regard and what they are telling us?
3. Levine et. al. (2011)
4. Studied the bystander effect using a different approach: social identity between who’s helping and who is not offering the help.
5. The shift of identity between being a fan of Manchester United or between being a football fan. How did the helping change in the 2 situations?
6. Why is this experiment important?
7. Application of something like this What do we find out about the bystander effect and group identity?



1. Nativism/ Empiricism-what is it telling us if people help selflessly (from here references to some cultural differences between people) cultural variations in morality
2. Method: the use of a questionnaire: is this method valid? Effective, differences between attitudes and behaviour? The couple who was helped by Americans (critical evaluation)
3. What is it telling us about helping? Helping selflessly



1. How helping is tested at different ages
2. Bloom experiment
3. What is the method used, what is it telling us about the babies?
4. Critical evaluation: is the behaviour selfless or is the behaviour the result of positive reinforcement.



Human diversity
1. The selfish Gene or that the humans are progressive, and that the society is becoming increasingly peaceful
2. Psychopaths who do good things: is it selflessly motivated
3. How the sense of morality and altruistic behaviour is dependent on certain brain structures.
4. Why such a discussion is important




1. Helping is something that helps people make sense of the world
2. Competitiveness as an individual or as a species


Critically evaluate whether people are truly altruistic

The feedback was constructive and a lot more detailed. The lines below summarises it.

-good critical evaluation but it should have been developed a bit more.

-the first sentence should outline the issue and the terms should be defined after.

-too much focus on altruism. Some reference to selfish behaviour was needed and a bit more critical evaluation.

The distinction between altruism and other prosocial behaviour consists of the fact that the help is given without expecting a reward in return (Manning & Levine, 2015, p. 192). People are motivated to help because they can feel empathy and they are able to take the perspective of the other person (Bierhoff, 2002, p. 9, cited in Manning & Levine, 2015, p. 192). Other definitions, in socio-biology and social psychology, underline the fact that the altruistic behaviour comes at a cost for the benefactor and it offers a survival advantage to the receiver (Coleman, 2015, p. 26). The essay will use an integrative approach, employing arguments from social, developmental, cognitive and biological psychology, showing how using different methodologies researchers draw different conclusions whether humans are genuinely altruistic, or they are selfish. Also, the theories and the research methods will be critically evaluated in terms of how valid and effective they are and ethical considerations about the research of altruism will be taken into account.

Interest in altruistic behaviour was sparked by the news of the tragic case of Kitty Genovese who was murdered in 1984 while 38 witnesses failed to do something about it. Even if researchers were cautious about accepting the information offered by the media as being completely true, the tragic event raised the question of whether people are naturally selfish? Latané and Darley (cited in Manning & Levine, 2015, p. 195) conducted a series of experiments in which the number of participants in a dangerous situation were varied. The conclusion was that the failure to offer help was explained by the diffusion of responsibility called the bystander effect. Over time, other experiments found similar results to the ones obtained by Latané and Darley, that people are less likely to offer help when others are present. The social psychology approach demonstrated that people behave differently when others are present than when they do on their own. Therefore, the likelihood to act in an altruistic way is mediated by the presence of others. Although the findings regarding the bystander effect are valid, the research focused on what the bystander effect is, and it did not offer a solution to how the bystander effect could be avoided or why sometimes people do help.

More recent studies on the bystander effect used CCTV footage to show how the gender and the number of bystanders influence their willingness to help. The research conducted by Levine and Crowther (2008, cited in Manning & Levine, 2015, p. 195) found differences between men and women in their willingness to intervene. Watching footage with gendered violence, women said they were likely to intervene when they were with other women than when they were on their own and men were more likely to help when they were on their own than when others were present. Another study conducted by Levine et al. (2011, Citation, 2018, a) used real CCTV footage depicting nighttime economy in the city centre, characterised by darkness and lots of drunk people. Levine et al. found that the likelihood of an aggressive act to stop depends on the number of bystanders who intervene. When there is one bystander who gets involved, the outcome of the aggression is more likely a negative one, but almost in all cases the aggression is likely to reach a positive outcome when 3 bystanders intervene. The use of CCTV footage does not raise ethical questions as the laboratory and field experiments do and the findings are effective because it shows how dangerous situations can be mediated in future events of aggression.

Another aspect in the study of altruistic behaviour was group identity. People are more likely to behave altruistically towards members of their own group because, from an evolutionary perspective, this type of behaviour increases the chance of survival. Levine et al. (2011) studied how the feeling of belonging to a certain group influences the help offered to a person in need. In an experiment the researchers recruited fans of Manchester United and in one condition they had to perform tasks which made their identity as Manchester United fans more salient, and in another condition their identity as football fans became more prominent. 70% of the participants who identified as football fans offered help to another Manchester United fan, but the help was twice as low when the injured person was wearing a Liverpool tee-shirt or an unbranded one. When the bystanders identified themselves as football fans, they offered help in the same proportion, regardless of what kind of tee shirt the injured person was wearing. The experiment conducted by Levine et al. does not only explain that people are going to act altruistically depending on the identity they belong to but also shows that the identity can also be manipulated. The more integrative an identity people will get, the more likely they are to offer help.

The debate between nativism and empiricism is a long going debate whether people are born with the capacity to act in an altruistic way - nativism or whether people learn how to be fair through the interaction with others – empiricism. In favour of the nativism are the biological arguments. Helping others such as members of the belonging group increase the chances of survival of the helper. But the person offering the help is not necessarily aware of the ‘genetic benefit’ and therefore it does not mean that the altruist is selfishly motivated (Pinker, 2011, p. 704). More recent research supports the argument for a biological cause of the altruistic behaviour. In a controlled experiment, the males who self-administered oxytocin were more likely to take financial decisions favouring their own group than those who were in the placebo condition, who were more likely to act selfishly (Carsten K. W. De Dreu et al., 2010).

The argument for empiricism is offered by developmental psychology and cultural psychology. Jean Piaget in ‘The Moral Development of the child’ (1997, cited in Ibbotson, 2015) used games with marbles to determine how kids make sense of the rules and how they understand the concept of fairness. Piaget proposed the concept of ‘rationalism’, meaning that children learn what is good and bad by themselves. According to Piaget, young children do not understand the concept of fairness because their cognitive functions are not the same as those of an adult and they are not capable of adopting the point of view of the other person. Kohlberg (1969, 1976, cited in Ibbotson, 2015) continued Piaget’s tradition and delimitated 6 stages of morality, from the ‘morality of obedience’ (first stage) to the ‘morality of non-arbitrary social cooperation’ when people cooperate in an impartial and rational way. Contrary to the argument from cognitive psychology used by Piaget and Kohlberg, Paul Bloom and Karen Wynn (Citation, 2018, c) argue that people are born with a sense of good and evil. They designed an experiment where 6-month-old babies watched an interaction between three characters. One of them is playing in a cooperative way and another one is running away with the ball. The findings were that at the end of the play, about 70% of the babies chose the good puppet and 30% chose the bad character. Although it seems that babies have a natural preference for the good character, one explanation is that babies chose to be around people who show a prosocial behaviour.

Other experiments (Warneken et al. 2011cited in Ibbotson, 2015, p. 124) demonstrate that even if young kids are not able to take the perspective of another person they still behave in a fair way. Three-year-old kids do share toys or sweets when they work with other kids to achieve rewards. Still, it is very difficult to assess if the three years olds are genuinely altruistic or if their behaviour is the result of the positive reinforcement for prosocial behaviour, they received from the time they were babies. Most likely, as Knafo et al. (2011) demonstrated, the altruistic behaviour is a combination between genetic heritage and environment. In a study with 168 pair twins, Knafo et al. (2011) showed that the genetics explain between 34% to 53% the prosocial behaviour, while the rest is accounted for by the environment. Moreover, where a specific dopamine receptor (D4, 7 repeat allele) was present, young children were more likely to show prosocial behaviour as a result of positive parenting. All these findings indicate that the young children have a natural ability to be altruistic. Studies with animals illustrate that when the chimpanzees have to cooperate to get a reward, the sharing is done depending on the dominance hierarchy.

In the study of altruism, researchers draw different, sometimes opposing conclusions depending on the theory and methods they used. While the bystander effect was validated by the multitude of experiments conducted in social psychology, it failed to explain why people do help. However, research using real life footage demonstrated that people do help, and that the gender and the number of the participants have an influence on the outcome of the intervention. Levine et al.’s studies demonstrate that many conflicts are solved because of the altruism of passers-by, and that the research of the bystander effect can be done without raising the same ethical questions as experimental designs where participants witness unpleasant situations. On the debate between nativism and empiricism, experiments with babies and young kids as well as strong evidence from biopsychology suggests that unlike animals, the capacity to be altruistic is innate. The essay showed that depending on the situation or the group of belonging, people may choose to act selfishly but there are modalities to help people to behave in a more altruistic way towards members of different groups by making their own group more integrative.

Year 2 Essay 1 (Plan and Example): Critically evaluate whether people are truly altruistic

Psychoanalytic ideas challenge some perspectives in social psychology, especially positive psychology that emphasises the rationality and self-determination of the actor. Instead, psychoanalysis moves its attention to the internal battles, the tension between the id, ego and superego, showing how concepts such as bestial self, relational self and defence mechanisms can help understand the social and cultural relationships in a global and diverse society. Psychoanalysis emerged at the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth century, with the work of Sigmund Freud (Breuer and Freud 1895, 1910, 1916-1917, cited in Kaposi, 2017, p. 130). Studying peoples’ slips of tongues, dreams and jokes, Freud (1910, 1915, cited in Kaposi, 2017, p. 130) postulated that behaviour is determined by unconscious dynamics. Over time, psychoanalysis became more than a method of treatment. Applying psychoanalytic ideas to qualitative studies allowed researchers to identify patterns of thinking, how different people use the same defence mechanisms to protect themselves from aspects of reality that are inconvenient. The essay will argue that even if psychoanalysis was developed in a clinical environment its concepts are used nowadays to understand human behaviour not only at micro levels but also at macro level.

In comparison with some other perspectives in social psychology, psychoanalysis offers a very different approach to studying social and cultural relationships. The human beings are not rational, capable of taking the best decisions to improve their well-being, as positive psychology states (Stenner, 2017). According to psychoanalysis, the psyche is formed of id, ego and superego. The id operates on “the pleasure principle”, but some of the wishes and drives cannot be expressed because society opposes them, therefore they become repressed. The superego is the ideal self that is self-regulatory in a way that concords with social expectations. The ego operates on the “reality principle” mediating between the id and superego (Freud, 1923, cited in Kaposi, 2017, p. 139). According to Freud, there is a continuous battle between the id and the ego and as a result people develop defence mechanisms, such as: projection -happens when feelings that cannot be tolerated are attributed to other people; denial- explained as the failure to recognise thoughts, feelings, desires; and repression- thoughts that cannot be accepted are eradicated from consciousness (Colman, 2008). The defence mechanisms are useful in explaining conflict between different groups of people and the passive attitude to the suffering of others. In this way, a social psychology informed by psychoanalytic concepts explores how some unwanted behaviours are reproduced in society. From a critical perspective, psychoanalysis can be considered a social psychology ‘from the standpoint of the subject’ (Motzkau & Taylor, 2017, p. 75), as it explores how people make sense of social representations. Psychoanalysis explores the concept of power in interpersonal relationships and the context in which the relationships develop is not taken for granted.

One trait of the psychoanalysis theory is that while it preserved most of its main theories, it kept developing and new concepts were added in order to explain peoples’ behaviour.According to Stephen Mitchell (1988 p. 136, cited in Kaposi, 2017, p.141), not only impulses and memories are repressed, but also relationships. Therefore, the unconscious is formed by a bestial self in the way Freud conceptualised the “id” and also by a relational self that consists of feelings of love or hate for other people (Mitchell, 1988, 1993, cited in Kaposi, 2017, p. 141). The relational self is useful in understanding how conflict between different groups of people persist. The defence mechanism of splitting determines the members of one group to see themselves as good people and the members of the group they are in conflict with as ‘evil’. This kind of behaviour was researched by the work of Ruth Sheldon (2016) through studying the conflict between Jewish and Palestinian students at British Universities. Using the ethnographic narrative, Sheldon explores how students understand and enact the conflict between the Israel and Palestine. Both Jewish and Palestinian students fail to acknowledge the suffering of the other group, while seeing themselves as a victim. While describing the conflict between student ‘Pro-Zionist’ and ‘Pro-Palestine’ campaigns, Sheldon considers the historical context as the student debate started in Britain in the 1960’s and it continued to intensify after the 1967 Six Day War. Sheldon acknowledges that the antagonistic narrative between the Jewish and Palestinian students takes place in democratic institutions and their debate is seen as freedom of speech, but their discourse becomes, as Sheldon puts it, a ‘reductive, racializing representation of the other’ (Sheldon, 2016, p. 175). The findings have a crucial significance as it can help policy makers to find ways to communicate and change the narrative of the conflict, perhaps through helping to understand each other’s fault in the cause of the conflict in order to move towards a peaceful coexistence.

The use of psychoanalysis in social psychology doesn’t have only exploratory applications, but it can also be used to solve conflicts. Vamik Volkan (cited in Hartmann, 2008) adopted the psychoanalytic method in the conflict resolution between different ethnic groups. His work had a multidisciplinary approach because he studied the political and social context in which conflict took place, as well as the psychological mechanism. Volkan offered an explanation about his interest in understanding and solving conflict, how psychoanalysis helped him make sense of his own identity in the political context of conflict between Greek Cypriots and Turk Cypriots. While being in the USA he felt survival guilt, and as a teacher, participating in a recreational target shooting he ‘envisioned the image of the Greek political leader who, in my mind, was causing incredible suffering for my family’ (Volkan, 2016). Although this thought scared him, Volkan understood how people might be motivated to kill ‘the other’ - who is seen as an enemy and he started researching how to promote peace. He used the ‘tree model’ in conflict resolution, where the ‘root’ is offered by the psychopolitical evaluation, the ‘trunk’ is the dialogue between leaders of both enemy camps and the ‘branches’ are the dialogue between the influential figures involved in conflict. The dialogue is conducted in the presence of a neutral team of experts that consists of psychoanalysts, historians and political scientists. The ‘tree model’ strategy was applied with success in Estonia while trying to solve the conflict between the Estonians and the minority Russian populations. Both groups had unconscious fears. The Estonians were afraid of being extinct as an ethnic group and the Russian minority was mourning about the separation from Russia. The way the dialogue was conducted allowed both parties to become aware about their unconscious processes and to change the ‘us versus them’ mentality. The project costed $3 million and it led to the resolution of the conflict. For his work, in 2004 Volkan was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (Hartmann, 2008). Perhaps one reason why the conflict between the Estonian and Russian populations was resolved was because the dialogue created space for a plurality of meanings for peoples’ actions. The collective representations based on a long tradition of thinking were challenged. Instead, the Estonians used ‘social representations’ by getting in touch with different ideas supported by the team of specialists that mediated the conflict. Social representations are ideas that develop when people meet individuals from a different cultural background (Moscovici, 1984, cited in Andreouli & Sammut 2017, p. 159). The dialogue between people of different ethnicities allows new social representations to emerge. ‘The other’ is not portrayed anymore as evil or foreign, but as another human being with similar feelings and thoughts.

Why people don’t offer help when they witness someone being in need of help has been a long interest for researchers. The psychoanalysis perspective in social psychology points out that thinking about the reality of other people in distress can be a painful experience and therefore, individuals develop defence mechanisms. A study conducted in UK with sixty-three participants with ages between nineteen and sixty-six who took part in twelve focus groups depicts that people use various tactics to deal with the suffering of others. Irene Bruna Seu (2014) presents the accounts given by the participants to a focus group after finding out about cases of human rights violations. For example, one participant, Leila said that: “after that I wanted to switch off. (…) you know you just feel like it’s kind of, like a kind of shield I’ve got up” Another participant, Tina, also gives the same account of “self-distancing”: “There was a point at which, I, not quite switched off but, the horror sort of subsided and, I don’t know.” When asked by the researcher “How did it happen?”, Tina replied: “I think it’s, in a way it’s because it’s like a defence mechanism. (…) And I can be horrified, immediately horrified by the stories but then, there’s a way of thinking well, telling yourself you can’t do anything about it. So then going off and sort of making yourself a cup of coffee or something. And switching off and getting on with your life.” The discussion with the participants in the focus groups allowed the researcher to understand how people cope with knowing about the tragedy in other people’s lives. The advantage of using rich data from qualitative studies facilitates the understanding of the bystander behaviour in a new way, it’s not only the social situation that determines the behaviour: the presence or the absence of others. The bystander behaviour can also be predicted by the way people react to news about others’ misfortune. Knowing that people use defence mechanisms to deal with information about human rights violations has practical applications. As Irene Bruna Seu emphasised (2014, p. 15), humanitarian campaigns are not successful when using shock tactics.

The psychoanalytic concepts such as projection, denial, repression and splitting are useful in offering an alternative explanation in social psychology for bystander behaviour. The classic studies in bystander behaviour are experiments, such as the one conducted by Bibb Latané and John Darley that showed that in the case of noticing smoke in a building, while being alone fifty-five per cent of people reported the smoke and while in groups of three, only 12 per cent signalled the smoke in the first two minutes. (Colman, A., 2008, p 107). The explanation that people don’t help in emergency situations because of diffused responsibility has not been contested in social psychology, but the experiments have low ecological validity and while they are good to illustrate the behaviour of individuals, they are not as useful in explaining social and political relationships. Why are citizens in developed countries not sensitive to the suffering of populations who experience famine, disease, war or genocide? Stanley Cohen (2001, cited in Seu, p.175) in the book ‘States of Denial’ theorises that when confronted with distressing realities, the public can deny the reality of the facts- ‘factual denial’, offer a different meaning to the reality- ‘interpretive denial’ or reject the moral, psychological and political implications- ‘implicatory denial’. For example, in the case of the Rwanda genocide when eight hundred thousand people were slaughtered, Belgium and the UN did not intervene to stop the killings, despite having forces in Rwanda (BBC, 2019). The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was established only a decade later to prosecute the leaders in the genocide (BBC, 2019). Applying Cohen’s concepts of denial, it can be explained why western powers witnessed the genocide but failed to offer help to the victims. At first, the ‘factual’ scale of killing was not recognised. Consequently, the killings were ‘interpreted’ as the result of the ethnic conflict between the majority Hutus and the minority Tutsi and the reality of the genocide was negated. Lastly, the act of allowing the genocide to be committed was interpreted as taking a stance of neutrality, not having a moral or legal obligation to intervene (Seu, 2014). 

The world is continuously changing but the interest for explaining conflict and human passivity to others’ suffering will always interest sociopsychology. The use of psychoanalytic ideas in social psychology allows researchers to explore darker issues about human behaviour that might not be so easily understood by using quantitative methods. Qualitative methods such as ethnographic narrative- in the study about the Jewish and Palestinian conflict and the interviews in the focus group conducted by Seu, allows researchers to identify patterns in peoples’ behaviour that illustrate that individuals are not rational beings, but they often use defence mechanisms in order to cope with the unpleasant and sad aspects of reality. One of the advantages of using psychoanalytic methods and ideas in social psychology is that it allows researchers to be reflexive to acknowledge their own subjectivity and what motivates them in their research. Studies using psychoanalytic ideas often take into consideration the wider social context in explaining cultural and social relationships between people. Unlike in other perspectives in social psychology, such as positive psychology, the context in which people live is not taken for granted. The internal struggle is acknowledged, and the change for better relationships is not imposed through will power alone, but through getting an understanding of other peoples’ perspectives.

Psychology Essays and Reports