Bassaleg Psychology - Lois

Front 1

Sport as an example of group display in humans (4 marks) - Xenophobia (A01)

Back 1

Wilson (1975) clamined that XENOPHOBIA, a fear of strangers has been documented in 'virtually every group of animals displaying higher forms of social organisation'. Natural Selection has caused humans to be altruistic toward members of their own group but intolerant towards outsiders. Shaw and Wong (1989) argue that mechanisms that prompt suspicion towards strangers would have been favoured by natural selection, enabling our ancestors to avoid attack, and so leave behind offspring.
Podaliri and Balestri (1998) found evidence of xenophobic tendancies in their analysis of the group displays of italian football crowds. E.g. Northern League led to the growth of extreme right wing movements characterised by racist chants and anti-Semitic banners in 1980s.

Front 2

Sport as an example of group display in humans (4 marks) - Territoriality (A01)

Back 2

Territoriality is the protective response to an invasion of ones territory. Huntington and Turner (1987) found the behaviour is common in many animal species which typically show threat displays toward outsiders and attack with greater vigour when defending a home territory.
Neave and Wolfson (2003) found that football teams playing at home were more likely to win than the visiting team partly because players have the benefit of a huge surge in testosterone before a match. They believed that this could be due to an evolved drive to defend home territory, leading to more aggressive displays when playing at home.

Front 3

Warfare - Benefits of aggressive displays (A01)

Back 3

In societies experiencing frequent warfare, males are more likely to escape infanticide than females because of their potential usefulness in battle. As a result, men must compete with eachother for mates, with those doing well in battle being 'rewarded' by access to female mates (Divale and Harris, 1976).
Displays of ferocity and aggressiveness by individual warriors would also lead peers to respect them more and so strengthen the bond between them and other males in the group. Because cooperation between males is so important to an individual's status in the group, fleeing from a battle would make the individual appear a 'coward', thus losing the respect of their peers.

Front 4

Warfare - Costly displays signal commitment (A01)

Back 4

Irons (2004) claims that the costliness of permanant displays such as scars and mutilation means that they serve as honest signals of commitment to the group. Individuals demonstrate their commitment and loyalty to the group and benefit from the profits of warfare from the group.
During battle, each individual has an incentive to keep himself out of harms way which, as a result exposes others to a greater risk of injury or death.

Front 5

Sports Evaluation (A02)

Back 5

Foldesi (1996) provides evidence supporting the link between Xenophobia and violent displays among Hungarian Football crowds. The racist conduct of a core of extremist supporters led to an increase in spectators' violence in general. Violent incidents based on racist or xenophobic attitudes were observed with gypsies, Jews and Russians the usual targets.

Front 6

Sports Evaluation (A02)

Back 6

Lewis et al (2005) found that among football fans, crowd support was rated the most significant factor contributing to a home advantage, through their displays of support, fans felt responsible for inspiring their team victory and distracting opponents. However, the prcise way in which the support has an effect is difficult to establish, for example the relationship with crowd size is unclear as the advantage has been show to operate even with very small crowds (Pollard and Pollard, 2005).

Front 7

Warfare Evaluation (A02)

Back 7

+ Palmer and Tilley (1995) supports the importance of aggressive displays in determing the sexual attractiveness of male warriors after finding that male youth street gang members have more sexual partners than ordinary young males.
Leunissen and Van Vugt (2010) also found that military men have greater sex appeal but only if they have been observed showing bravery in combat.

Front 8

Warfare Evaluation (A02)

Back 8

- Explanations of displays of aggression that are based on mating success, status or commitement fail to explain the levels of cruelty often found in human wars yet not among human species. for example, why do humans torture or mutilate their opponents when they have already been defeated and no longer pose a threat? Watson (1973) suggests this may be more a consequence of deindividuation effects than of evolutionary adaptions.

Front 9

Evaluation IDA - Gender Bias (A02)

Back 9

Evolutionary explanations for warfare demonstrate a gender bias as they do not eflect the behaviour of women in this process. Adams (1983) claimed that the woman warrior is unheard of within most societies, even in those that allow women to participate in war. Women have less to gain from fighting in near death situations and more to lose in terms of their reproductive capacity. Also women do not increase their fitness nearly as much as men therefore our understanding of the displays found in warfare is limited to the behaviour of mwales rather han females.

Front 10

Evaluation IDA - Real World Application (A02)

Back 10

In Germany, December 1992, Xenophobia motivated football clubs to minimise the influence of violence in their games. All teams in the Bundersleague played in shirts promoting 'My Friend is a Foreigner'. In England, racism divides' have attempted to forge stronger links with local ethnic countries. In 2012, the UK government pledged £200,000 to anti racism football charity Show Racism the Red Card to counter the influence of groups like the English Defence League.