Welcome to Individual Differences: Understanding Disorders
Hello and welcome! In this chapter of your OCR A Level Psychology course, we explore the fascinations of the Individual Differences area under the key theme: Understanding disorders.
Have you ever wondered why people think, feel, and behave so differently from one another? Or why some people develop phobias while others develop conditions like Autism Spectrum Disorder? This chapter pairs two landmark studies to explore those exact questions:
1. The Classic Study: Sigmund Freud (1909) — Little Hans and his horse phobia.
2. The Contemporary Study: Simon Baron-Cohen et al. (1997) — Theory of Mind in adults with Autism or Asperger Syndrome.
Don't worry if psychological terms feel intimidating at first. We will break down every concept step-by-step with clear explanations, relatable analogies, and helpful memory tricks!
Quick Summary of the Key Theme: The theme Understanding disorders tracks how psychology has evolved from exploring disorders through deep, subjective, unconscious conflicts (Freud) to testing precise, objective, cognitive and biological differences (Baron-Cohen et al.).
---1. Core Principles of the Individual Differences Area
Before diving into the studies, let's understand what makes the Individual Differences area unique.
Core Assumptions:
• Everyone is Unique: Human behaviour, cognition (thinking), and emotion vary significantly between individuals. We cannot assume everyone functions the exact same way.
• Idiographic vs Nomothetic Approaches: Psychologists can understand differences by looking deeply at single individuals (an idiographic approach, like a detailed case study) or by establishing general laws that apply across groups of people (a nomothetic approach, like a standardised psychological test).
• Multiple Causes of Disorders: Psychological disorders and variances can stem from internal psychodynamic conflicts (unconscious struggles from childhood) or from specific cognitive and biological differences (such as brain functioning and Theory of Mind).
Everyday Analogy: Think of human minds like computer operating systems. Some differences are like custom software glitches or hidden background processes (Freud's unconscious conflicts), while others are built-in hardware or processing variations (Baron-Cohen's cognitive differences).
---2. The Classic Study: Freud (1909) — Little Hans
Full Title: Analysis of a phobia of a five-year-old boy
Key Focus: Explaining a young boy's severe phobia using psychodynamic theory.
Background & Theoretical Context
Sigmund Freud believed that children pass through stages of development called psychosexual stages. Around ages 3 to 5, children enter the phallic stage, where their focus is on their genitals ("widdler").
During this stage, Freud proposed that young boys experience the Oedipus complex:
1. The boy unconsciously desires exclusive love and physical affection from his mother.
2. He views his father as a powerful rival and unconsciously wishes to get rid of him.
3. The boy fears that his father will discover these secret wishes and punish him by removing his penis — a fear Freud called castration anxiety.
4. To overcome this anxiety, the boy must eventually identify with his father (adopt his father's values and masculinity), resolving the complex.
Aim of the Study
To document and provide empirical support for the psychosexual stages of development (specifically the phallic stage and Oedipus complex) by explaining the origin and resolution of a child's phobia.
Method, Design & Participant
• Method: Longitudinal clinical case study (an idiographic approach).
• Participant: One young boy named Herbert Graf, referred to as "Little Hans", aged 3 to 5 years old, living in Vienna, Austria.
• Data Collection: Data was gathered almost entirely second-hand. Hans's father (a devoted follower of Freud) observed Hans, asked him questions, recorded his dreams, conversations, and phobias, and sent regular written letters to Freud. Freud analysed these letters and sent instructions back. Freud met Hans directly in person only once for a brief consultation!
Key Observations & Psychoanalytic Interpretations
Hans developed a severe, debilitating fear: a phobia of horses. He was terrified that a horse would bite him in the street and terrified of large cart horses falling down.
Freud explained this using the defence mechanism of displacement — Hans shifted his unconscious fear of his father onto horses:
1. The Horse as the Father:
• The horse's black blinkers and dark muzzle symbolised the father's eyeglasses and dark moustache.
• The fear of being bitten by the horse represented Hans's unconscious castration anxiety (fear that his father would castrate him for desiring his mother).
• Hans's fear of a horse falling down represented his repressed death wish toward his father (wishing his father would die/fall), which caused Hans immense unconscious guilt.
2. Preoccupation with the "Widdler":
• Hans showed intense interest in his own penis ("widdler") and compared it with animals and his parents. When his mother warned him not to play with his widdler or she would send for the doctor to cut it off, it amplified his castration fears.
• Hans also noticed that his baby sister Hanna did not have a widdler, reinforcing his belief that losing it was a real possibility.
3. The Resolution Fantasies:
Hans's phobia eventually disappeared after two symbolic breakthrough fantasies:
• The Giraffe Fantasy: Hans imagined a large giraffe and a crumpled giraffe in his bedroom. The big giraffe shouted because Hans took the crumpled one away and sat on it. Freud interpreted the big giraffe as the father, the crumpled giraffe as the mother, and Hans taking the crumpled giraffe as Hans symbolically claiming his mother.
• The Plumber Fantasy: Hans imagined a plumber coming to his house, removing his buttocks and small widdler with pincers, and replacing them with a larger buttocks and a larger widdler like his father's. Freud saw this as the ultimate resolution: Hans identified with his father, accepted his masculine identity, and his horse phobia completely resolved.
Conclusions
• Phobias can stem from repressed, unconscious sexual and aggressive conflicts that are displaced onto external objects or animals.
• The case of Little Hans provided clinical support for Freud's theories of infantile sexuality, psychosexual stages, and the universal nature of the Oedipus complex.
Quick Review: Freud (1909)
• Participant: 1 boy (Little Hans, age 3–5).
• Key Disorder: Phobia of horses.
• Root Cause: Oedipus complex and castration anxiety displaced onto horses.
• Resolution: Identification with the father (Plumber fantasy).
3. The Contemporary Study: Baron-Cohen et al. (1997) — Autism in Adults
Full Title: Another advanced test of theory of mind: Evidence from very high functioning adults with autism or Asperger syndrome
Key Focus: Investigating advanced Theory of Mind deficits in adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Asperger Syndrome (AS).
Background & Theoretical Context
What is Theory of Mind (ToM)?
Theory of Mind is the cognitive ability to attribute mental states (such as emotions, desires, intentions, and beliefs) to oneself and others. It allows us to understand that other people have thoughts and perspectives that are completely different from our own.
• The Ceiling Effect Problem: Earlier tests of ToM (like the famous Sally-Anne test) were designed for young children. High-functioning adults with autism (HFA) or Asperger syndrome (AS) easily passed these simple tests because the tests had a low developmental ceiling (around age 4 to 6). However, these adults still struggled significantly with everyday social interactions. Baron-Cohen et al. needed a new, adult-level, advanced test to measure subtle mentalising abilities!
Aims of the Study
1. To test whether high-functioning adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or Asperger Syndrome (AS) show impairments on a novel, advanced Theory of Mind test: the "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" task.
2. To see if there are normal gender differences in Theory of Mind performance in the general population (predicting that neurotypical females perform better than neurotypical males).
Design & Variables
• Research Method: Quasi-experiment (the independent variable is naturally occurring clinical status).
• Independent Variable (IV): Group type (ASD/AS group, Neurotypical control group, Tourette Syndrome control group).
• Dependent Variable (DV): Score on the 25-item Eyes Task (scored out of 25).
The Sample (\(N = 76\) Total Participants)
The researchers tested three distinct groups:
1. Group 1 (Autism / Asperger Syndrome): \(n = 16\) (13 males, 3 females). All had normal or above-average intelligence (\(\text{IQ} > 85\)). Recruited through clinical adverts.
2. Group 2 (Neurotypical / Normal Controls): \(n = 50\) (25 males, 25 females). Age-matched adults from the general population / Cambridge subject panel with no psychiatric history.
3. Group 3 (Tourette Syndrome Control): \(n = 10\) (8 males, 2 females). Age-matched adults of normal intelligence.
Why include Tourette Syndrome? (Crucial Exam Point!):
Tourette Syndrome (TS) is an organic neurodevelopmental condition that starts in childhood and can cause social disruption (due to tics). However, TS does not involve a core Theory of Mind deficit. By including the TS group, researchers could prove that poor performance on the Eyes Task is specific to Autism/AS and not just caused by having a neurodevelopmental disorder or experiencing social difficulties!
Tasks & Standardised Procedure
Participants completed four tasks in a standardised, controlled setting:
1. The Eyes Task (Target Task):
• Participants were shown 25 black-and-white photographs of the eye region of human faces.
• Standardised size: \(15 \times 10\text{ cm}\), cropped from the bridge of the nose to just above the eyebrows.
• Each image was displayed for 3 seconds.
• Participants completed a two-alternative forced choice between two words describing a mental state (e.g., "sympathetic" vs "unsympathetic", or "concerned" vs "unconcerned"). There was one correct target emotion and one foil word.
2. Control Tasks (To prevent confounding variables):
• Gender Recognition Task: Participants identified the biological sex (male vs female) using the same 25 eye photos. This checked basic face perception.
• Basic Emotion Recognition Task: Participants identified basic emotions (happy, sad, angry, afraid, disgusted, surprised from Ekman's 6 basic emotions) on full-face photos to ensure they had no general visual processing impairment.
• Strange Stories Task (Happé, 1994): An established advanced story-based ToM test used to check concurrent validity (if a participant scored low on the Eyes Task, they should also struggle on the Strange Stories task).
Key Findings
• Eyes Task Mean Scores (out of 25):
– ASD / AS Group: 16.3 (significantly lower performance than both other groups).
– Neurotypical Group: 20.3.
– Tourette Syndrome Group: 20.4.
• Gender Differences in the Normal Control Group:
– Females scored significantly higher (mean 21.8) than males (mean 18.8).
– Importantly, normal males still performed significantly better than the ASD/AS group (18.8 vs 16.3).
• Control Tasks Performance:
– The ASD/AS group scored normally on the Gender Recognition and Basic Emotion tasks. This proved their low Eyes Task score was not due to poor eyesight or general brain impairment!
– The ASD/AS group made significantly more errors on the Strange Stories task, confirming concurrent validity.
Conclusions
• Theory of Mind deficits persist into adulthood in individuals with high-functioning autism and Asperger syndrome.
• Social and communication difficulties in ASD are caused by a specific cognitive deficit in advanced mentalising (reading subtle mental states), not a general perceptual problem.
• The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" task is a valid and sensitive test for assessing advanced Theory of Mind in adults.
Quick Review: Baron-Cohen et al. (1997)
• Sample: 16 ASD/AS, 50 Controls, 10 Tourette's (\(N = 76\)).
• Method: Quasi-experiment, 25 eye pairs, 2-choice forced answer.
• Result: ASD mean = 16.3 vs Normal = 20.3 vs TS = 20.4.
• Females scored higher: 21.8 (Females) vs 18.8 (Males).
4. How These Studies Advance the Key Theme: Understanding Disorders
Let's look at how psychology progressed across these two core studies:
1. Shift in Explanation (Psychodynamic to Cognitive/Biological)
• Freud (1909): Explained disorders through internal, unconscious psychodynamic conflicts (the Oedipus complex, repression, and displacement). Disorders were seen as emotional struggles originating from psychosexual childhood development.
• Baron-Cohen et al. (1997): Explained disorders through specific cognitive impairments (Theory of Mind / mentalising deficits) rooted in neurodevelopment and biology.
2. Shift in Methodology (Subjective to Objective Science)
• Freud: Used an idiographic, qualitative case study based on second-hand letters from a biased parent, lacking standardised controls or objective measurement.
• Baron-Cohen et al.: Used a nomothetic, highly standardised, quantitative quasi-experiment with precise controls (control groups, matched variables, control tasks) producing objective numerical data.
3. Understanding of Diversity
• Freud: Focused on a single, upper-middle-class Austrian boy living in 1908 Vienna, assuming his psychosexual journey was universal to all humans.
• Baron-Cohen et al.: Explored neurodiversity (comparing autistic minds, Tourette's minds, and neurotypical minds) and investigated gender differences in social cognition and empathy.
5. Evaluation & Core Debates
When writing essay answers, you must evaluate these studies using core psychological debates:
• Psychology as a Science:
– Freud: Very unscientific. Concepts like the Oedipus complex and unconscious displacement cannot be empirically tested or falsified. Paternal reports were open to extreme confirmation bias and leading questions.
– Baron-Cohen et al.: Highly scientific. Follows the hypothetico-deductive model with standardised stimulus sizes (\(15 \times 10\text{ cm}\)), presentation times (3 seconds), and control tasks that isolate the independent variable.
• Nature vs Nurture:
– Freud: Interactionist. Combines innate biological drives/stages of libido (nature) with parenting experiences, maternal warnings, and seeing horses fall (nurture).
– Baron-Cohen et al.: Strongly leans toward nature, viewing Theory of Mind deficits as an innate neurodevelopmental difference.
• Freewill vs Determinism:
– Freud: Psychic determinism — Hans's thoughts, phobias, and fantasies were determined by unconscious psychosexual drives outside his conscious control.
– Baron-Cohen et al.: Biological/cognitive determinism — an individual's ability to read mental states is determined by neurological functioning.
• Reductionism vs Holism:
– Freud: Relatively holistic in data collection (analysing dreams, family dynamics, daily conversations, and emotional history), but reductionist in boiling all human motivations down to psychosexual energy.
– Baron-Cohen et al.: Reductionist. It reduces the complex, rich social world of human emotion down to a static score out of 25 on black-and-white photos of eyes.
• Individual vs Situational Explanations:
– Freud: Individual explanation (internal unconscious conflicts within Little Hans).
– Baron-Cohen et al.: Individual explanation (innate cognitive and neurological processing differences within the person).
6. Examiner Pitfalls & Common Mistakes to Avoid
Watch out for these common traps that cost students marks in exams:
Trap 1: Confusing the 1997 study with the 2001 study!
• Common Error: Writing that participants were given 36 photos with 4 multiple-choice options.
• The Fact: In the 1997 OCR specification study, there were 25 photographs and 2 forced-choice options (target vs foil). The 36-item/4-choice version was a later revision in 2001. Stick to 1997!
Trap 2: Believing Freud conducted daily therapy with Little Hans!
• Common Error: Saying Freud sat on a couch with Hans every week.
• The Fact: Freud met Little Hans directly in person only once. Hans's father conducted all interviews and observations, sending written letters to Freud.
Trap 3: Misunderstanding why Tourette Syndrome was used!
• Common Error: Thinking Tourette Syndrome was an experimental group with autism.
• The Fact: The TS group was a clinical control group. It proved that ToM deficits are unique to Autism/AS and not simply a byproduct of having a socially disruptive childhood neurodevelopmental condition.
Trap 4: Forgetting the Theme in Essay Questions!
• Common Error: Evaluating the studies' sample sizes without linking back to the question.
• The Fact: Always link your evaluation back to the thematic title: How does this help us in understanding disorders?
7. Handy Memory Aids (Mnemonics)
Use these simple memory hooks to keep the core facts locked in your mind:
• H-A-N-S for Freud (1909):
– H: Horse phobia (displacement of father fear).
– A: Anxiety of Castration (fear father will remove his "widdler").
– N: Nature + Nurture (innate phallic stage triggered by seeing a falling horse).
– S: Single case study (one boy, \(N=1\), second-hand letters from father).
• E-Y-E-S for Baron-Cohen et al. (1997):
– E: Eyes Task (25 black-and-white cropped photos, 3 seconds each, 2 choices).
– Y: Youth ceiling overcome (advanced adult test replacing Sally-Anne).
– E: Ekman & Gender controls (basic emotion and sex recognition ruled out visual deficits).
– S: Specific deficit (ASD scored 16.3, significantly lower than TS at 20.4 and Normals at 20.3; Females scored highest at 21.8).
8. Key Takeaways Summary
• Freud (1909) demonstrated that disorders like phobias could be explained psychodynamically through unconscious conflicts, infantile sexuality, and displacement during the phallic stage (Oedipus complex).
• Baron-Cohen et al. (1997) proved that high-functioning adults with ASD/AS have persistent, specific deficits in advanced Theory of Mind (mentalising) using the 25-item Eyes Task.
• The Key Theme Progression: Understanding disorders moved from subjective, non-falsifiable, idiographic psychoanalysis to objective, highly controlled, nomothetic cognitive neuroscience.