Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Chaney et al - Evaluation - Coggle Diagram
Chaney et al - Evaluation
Tell a Story
Background
Rates of compliance for offering medication regularly to asthmatic children range from 30-70%, while compliance rates for correct pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI) technique range from 39-67%
Method
Design: field experiment, repeated measures. IVs were whether child used Funhaler or standard small volume spacer device. DV was amount of adherence to prescribed medical regime
Sample: 32 children (22m, 10f) mean age 3.2 years, mean duration of asthma 2.2 years. Children's parents gave informed consent and helped when necessary with use of inhalers
Procedure: Given Funhaler for two weeks and reported on phone to ad hoc basis about use of Funhaler. Matched questionnaires completed by parents
Results
81% children using Funhaler medicated previous day compared to 59%
30% more children took recommended delivery using Funhaler
Standard spacer only 3/30 always successful compared to 22/30 with Funhaler
Conclusions
May improve health of children
How does the study relate to the area
Developmental because it is illustrating another way in which children's behaviour can be influenced by external factors - in this case, the presence of positive and negative reinforcers
How does the study relate to the perspective
Behaviourist because of the way it provides empirical evidence for operant conditioning (both positive and negative reinforcement). Results found increased adherence, due to the positive reinforcement provided by the funhaler
Core studies in their pairs
How does the contemporary study change our understanding of individual, social and cultural diversity
Individual: Bandura showed that males and females imitate behaviour differently and are affected more by same sex role models. Chaney et al furthered the understanding of how males and females learn behaviours but did not differentiate between them as Bandura did
Social: The classic study Bandura et al explained the causes of behaviour and Chaney et al furthered an understanding of how behaviourist theories can be used to improve behaviour
How the studies differ
One difference between the studies is that Bandura is a lab experiment whilst Chaney is a field experiment. This means that Bandura takes place in a controlled, standardised environment, whilst Chaney takes place in a natural environment for the participants. Bandura's study takes place in a classroom at Stanford university. However Chaney's study took place in the child's home
How the studies are similar
One way the studies are similar is that they both collected quantitative data, meaning all the results were numerical. Bandura calculated mean aggression scores and an example is, for the physical girls with female aggressive models, the score was 5.5. Similarly, with Chaney, 81% of children who used the Funhaler were found to have been medicated the previous day compared to 59% who used the standard inhaler
How the contemporary study changes understanding of the key theme
The key theme is external influences on children's behaviour. In Bandura's study, they came to the conclusion that children can learn behaviour through observation and imitation. Chaney furthered our understanding by investigating improvement of compliance in children. They did this by recruiting random children from clinics across a large area that have been diagnosed with asthma and prescribed an inhaler. They then gave the participants a 'Funhaler' to use for two weeks. Compliance was measured with parents reporting back on an ad hoc basis whether the child had received the correct dose the previous day or not. They found that 81% had medicated the previous day with the Funhaler compared to 59% that used the standard spacer device. This adds to our understanding as it shows us that children learn behaviours through bribery (the toys on the Funhaler) as well as imitation
Research methods/techniques
One strength of using a repeated measures design is that it reduces the chances of individual differences affecting the results. This means that, using the same participants for both IVs, means that the results will be easier to compare and will allow the experimenter to know that any differences in results will be due to the IVs and not individual differences. In Chaney's study, each child uses both the standard spacer as well as the funhaler, so differences in how often the child correctly takes their medication is down to the devices and not the child
One weakness of using a field experiment is that the environment cannot be standardised. This means that the experimenter has no control over the environment in which the participants take part in the study. In Chaney's study, the participants take part in the study in their own homes, which will be different for each participant