Chapter 18 Flashcards

(54 cards)

1
Q

Group

A

A group consists of two or more people. Individuals in the group must interact with each other over a period of time. Individuals in a group must influence each other. Members of a group must have a common purpose.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Power

A

A person is said to have power over another if there is a reasonable expectation
that the second person will behave in the way the rst person desires, even against the second person’s own wishes. For example, a motor mechanic has power over a customer with little mechanical knowledge. However, the employer has power over the mechanic, who may need this job to feed and house their family.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

6 sources of power

A
Reward
Coercive
Information
Legitimate
Expert Power
Referent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is leadership

A

The ability to manage or regulate other people.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Reward

A

Ability to provide a desired response

Teacher can allow students to leave early

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Coercive

A

Ability to provide an unpleasant response

Teacher can detain students

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Information

A

Having knowledge that others desire

Secretary knows where all information is filed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Legitimate

A

Power is given by a higher authority and may be due to role or position
Police officer or coach of sports team

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Expert

A

Power is due to skills and depth of knowledge

Doctor or motor mechanic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Referent

A

Power from others’ desire to relate to the person

Admired sports star or a good friend

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

3 Leadership Styles

A

Democratic
Authoritarian
Laissez-faire

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Democratic

A

The leader negotiates tasks with the group members.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Authoritarian

A

The leader makes all the decisions and controls the behaviour of the group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Laissez-faire

A

The leader takes no part in the proceedings.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Results of leadership study

A

As predicted, the democratic group was happier and more productive than the other two. The authoritarian group was productive, but only when the leader was actively managing the process. The laissez-faire group was low in productivity and its members were less happy than members of either of the other groups.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Year and location of Zimbardo’s prison experiment

A

1971, Stanford University

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Participant selection

A

To obtain participants for this experiment, an advertisement was placed in the university newspaper o ering volunteers US$15 per day (about $120 in today’s Australian money).
All 70 of those who applied were interviewed and given personality tests. The 24 applicants who showed the highest levels of physical health and mental stability were selected. Eighteen
of them were randomly allocated to be either ‘prison guards’ or ‘prisoners’; the remaining six stayed on call to make up numbers if a participant dropped out during the experiment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Prison superintendent and guards, uniform and instructions

A

The prison superintendent (high status) was Dr Phillip Zimbardo.

The guards (high status) were given:
> military-style uniforms and re ective sunglasses to
disguise their individuality and cause them to have fewer inhibitions about the way they behave (this process is called deindividuation)
> whistles and batons to emphasise their authority.

The guards were instructed:
> to impose their will on the prisoners using psychological intimidation
> not to use physical violence on prisoners
> to blindfold prisoners when they needed to leave the prison to use the toilet
> to touch the prisoners with their batons if necessary, but not hit them.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Prisoners, uniform and instructions

A

The prisoners (low status) were given:
> short, sack-like smocks to wear, with no underwear
> hats made of ladies’ stockings to cover their hair
> a prison number
> a chain around the ankles, to ensure that they could never forget their status. The prisoners were instructed:
> to obey all instructions from the guards
> to ask permission to use the toilet, smoke a cigarette or write a letter
> to refer to themselves by their prison number, not their name; together with their
garments, this meant that deindividuation applied to the prisoners, with the e ect of reducing their sense of self.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

The setting

A

The setting was the basement of the Psychology Department at Stanford University, which had:
> no windows
> cells, 2 m × 3 m in size, opening o a corridor which was boarded up at each end
> opposite the cells, a cupboard of 60 cm × 60 cm × 213 cm, tall enough to stand up
in, used as the solitary con nement cell.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

9 Step Procedure

A
  1. Mock arrests.
  2. Police car taking prisoners to station.
  3. Prisoners fingerprinted and blindfolded.
  4. Taken to jail in prison van, interviewed by superintendent.
  5. Prisoners stripped and sprayed with delousing agent.
  6. Prisoners issued clothing.
  7. Guards worked shifts to watch over prisoners.
  8. Prisoners woken early morning to attend role call.
  9. Guards punished prisoners, push ups, humiliating acts, i love you, walk like Frankenstein.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Deindividuation

A

Deindividuation is the loss of self awareness in groups. The guards were given military-style uniforms and reflective sunglasses to disguise their individuality and cause them to have fewer inhibitions about the way they behave (this process is called deindividuation).

23
Q

Aim

A

To investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life, to see if it was personality traits or situational characteristics caused the participants behaviour.

24
Q

IV AND DV

A

The independent variable of the experiment is the random assignment of roles as either guard or prisoner. The dependent variable is the measured behaviour of the participants in the simulated prison.

25
RESULTS
It seemed that the situation, rather than the participants individual personalities, caused the participants' behaviour. These results do not support the hypothesis which thought that personality traits are what caused prisoner abuse.
26
Why was it abandoned
It was abandoned on the sixth day for two main reasons, Zimbardo and his colleagues realised while watching footage, that the guards were increasing their abuse of prisoners during the night when they thought no one was watching. The main reason however was that Christina Maslach who was dating Phillip Zimbardo at the time, came to the ‘prison’. She was upset with Zimbardo, and told him that if this was a true indication of the sort of person he was, there would be no hope for their relationship. I believe that it should have been abandoned as soon as the first prisoner suffered severe emotional distress as this should have indicated that the study was severely effecting the mental state of the prisoners and was highly unethical.
27
What did Zimbardo discover after many years if further study
Zimbardo proposed that in many circumstances there are no bad people; there are simply bad environments that make ordinary people act in bad ways.
28
Two violations of ethical principles
Two violations of ethical principles were the violation of the no harm principle, although counselling was offered to participants, some were still reporting negative effects 40 years later and the violation of withdrawal rights, their was pressure put on the ‘inmate’ who became distressed and wished to withdraw.
29
Obedience
Obedience is compliance with commands given by an authority figure.
30
AIM OF MILGRIM EXPERIMENT
The aim was to discover whether participants would obey an authority gure and carry out actions that caused severe pain to another person.
31
What participants were told MILGRIM
Participants were told that there had been little research on the use of punishment as a method of teaching and that this was to be a valuable scienti c experiment that could be of great bene t to society.
32
PARTICIPANTS
The participants were 40 male volunteers, aged 20 to 50 years who were paid paid them US$4.50 for the hour of participationParticipants were told that they would keep the money even if they did not complete the experiment.
33
MATERIALS
The ‘teacher’ sat at a control panel with 30 switches and several imposing dials and lights. The switches were labelled with their power output: from 15 to 450 volts in 15-volt increments. The ‘learner’, in another room but within earshot of the teacher, was strapped into a chair with his arms bound to the arms of the chair and electrodes strapped to his bare wrists
34
PROCEDURE
Participants (acting as "teachers") gave what they thought were electric shocks to "learners". If at any time the subject ("teacher") wanted to stop the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter. If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was halted. Milgram found that some of the "teachers" became very nervous.
35
RESULTS
All 40 participants obeyed up to the 300-volt level and 65% obeyed to the final 450 volt shock.
36
CONCLUSION
From this initial experiment, and the many variations he performed, Milgram concluded that people are very likely to perform actions contrary to their beliefs and wishes if they are instructed to do so by an authority figure.
37
5 reasons for the high level of obedience
1 Yale University is a prestigious institution. 2 Participants believed they were taking part in valuable scienti c research. 3 Participants believed that the learner had volunteered. 4 Participants felt obligated. 5 Payment increased the sense of obligation.
38
Two violations of ethical principles
No harm principle. Participants showed extreme anxiety about what they were asked to do; nervous laughter from 14 participants and uncontrollable seizures from three participants meant that their rights were violated. Withdrawal rights. The prods used by the researcher to ensure that the experiment continued even though participants expressed the desire to stop were a direct violation of participants’ rights. Participants must be allowed to withdraw at any stage without any attempt to prevent them from doing so.
39
2 procedural issues
Sampling The sample was not representative of the population about which Milgram wished to draw conclusions (adult Americans). The sample contained males only and they were all white Americans. Setting The experiment (and all later variations) was conducted in a laboratory. There is no evidence that similar results would be found outside a formal laboratory setting.
40
Conformity
Conformity is the most common and pervasive form of social influence. It is informally defined as the tendency to act or think like members of a group. In psychology, conformity is defined as the act of matching attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to group norms.
41
ASCH'S EXPERIMENT AIM
The aim was to investigate the extent to which an individual within a group will conform to the majority opinion.
42
PARTICIPANTS ASCH
In the First experiment, participants were 50 rst-year college students.
43
Materials: Asch
Each student viewed a card with a line on it, followed by another with three lines labeled "A", "B", and "C" (See accompanying figure). One of these lines was the same as that on the first card, and the other two lines were clearly longer or shorter
44
5 STEPS ASCH PROCEDURE
1 Participants were told that this was an experiment to study visual perception. 2 Participants were placed in a group with seven to nine confederates (planted actors). 3 The participant was always the second-last in the group to give an opinion. 4 The group was shown the two cards and asked: ‘Which line on Card B is closest in length to the line on Card A?’ 5 In 12 of the 18 trials the confederates all gave the same wrong answer; in the other six trials they gave the correct answer.
45
ASCH RESULTS
> Of the 50 participants, 37 (74 per cent) conformed on at least one occasion, giving the same wrong answer as the confederates.
46
ASCH CONCLUSION
Asch concluded that participants conformed for two main reasons: 1 Participants wanted to feel that they belonged in the group. 2 Participants believed that other group members were better informed than they. Asch himself commented (1955) that it is a matter of concern that we have so strong a tendency towards conformity in our society, calling into question our education system and society’s values.
47
META ANALYSIS
A meta-analysis is research that examines the results of many other studies and combines all the ndings. This means that the researchers can have increased con dence in the conclusions because the results support each other, e ectively increasing the size of the sample used and making statistical procedures more rigorous.
48
What 7 factors effecting conformity/obedience/power did Smith and Bonds meta analysis discover
``` > normative in uence > culture > informational in uence > group size > unanimity > deindividuation > social loa ng. ```
49
NORMATIVE INFLUENCE
Normative in uence simply refers to a person’s tendency to go along with the group so that they will t in and gain the approval of other group members. It has been found that if group members are very similar to each other (such as in age, race and gender), there will be greater normative in uence, increasing the pressure towards conformity. Since almost all studies replicating Asch’s experiments have used college students as participants, this has been a signi cant factor. If other group members are people from whom the participant wants to gain approval – possibly teachers, family members or friends – the tendency towards conformity is further increased.
50
Informational influence
Informational in uence refers to the increased tendency to conform when the participant wants to provide a correct response but is not certain of their ability to do so, believing that others are more capable of making accurate judgements. This is a very common cause of conformity. For example, if you are cooking a new dish for dinner and you are not certain which spices to use, you could ask a friend’s opinion. If you believe your friend has good judgement in this area, you conform and follow his or her advice.
51
GROUP SIZE
Asch varied the number of confederates from one to 15. He found that conformity rates increased to a maximum with three or four confederates, and then remained approximately the same. However one there is a very large group size conformity can decreases as people become more anonymous.
52
UNANIMITY
If one of the confederates did not conform with the group, but gave the correct answer, conformity rate dropped from the average of four out of 12 to one out of 12. Asch believed that there are three factors in uencing this signi cant di erence: 1 The participant observed that the majority did not criticise or make fun of the dissenting confederate. 2 There was now social pressure in two directions – from the dissenter as well as the majority. 3 The dissenter increased the participant’s belief that the majority was wrong.
53
DEINDIVIDUATION
When the individual identifying characteristics are removed making them more anonymous they can’t be identified as individuals and judged by others.
54
social loafing
Social loafing is the tendency of an individual to reduce their e ort when working in a group, compared with when they are working alone. In terms of conformity, when a task requires some e ort (for example, if the lines in the Asch stimuli are similar in size and require careful scrutiny in order to distinguish the correct answer), the participant may conform with the majority simply to avoid the e ort involved in making a personal judgement.