social influence L1-7 Flashcards

Question

Weaknesses of SPE

Answer 1

Lack of research support: - main weakness - Reicher and Haslam (2006) partially recreated SPE in BBC Prison Experiment, broadcast on BBC, findings were v different to Zimbardos results, was prisoners who took control of the mock prison, subjecting guards to a campaign of harassment and disobedience - Reicher and Haslam (2006) used Social Identity Theory (SIT 1981), to explain this outcome, as guards failed to develop shared identity as cohesive group, prisoners did, they actively identified themselves, as members of social group, refused to accept limits of assigned role of prisoners Ethical Issues: - Zimbardo’s dual role in the study, eg. On one occasion student wanted to leave the study, spoke to Zimbardo, in his role as a superintendent. Whole conversation conducted on basis that student was prisoner, asking to be released, but responded as a superintendent worried about running his prison, rather than a researcher with responsibility towards participants - deception used / lack of informed support = prisoners didnt know they would be arrested in their own homes = psychological distress caused by this would’ve scarred prisoners quite a bit - extensive group and individual debriefing sessions were held, all participants returned post-experimental questionnaires several weeks, months and years after Zimbardo argued that benefits about understanding human behaviour and how we can improve society, balances out distress study caused

Answer 2

- Only deception was arrest of prisoners at beginning experiment, not told partly as approval from police not given til last minute, partly wanted it to be a surprise, but was a breach of ethics Zimbardo’s own contract all participants signed - experiment was abandoned after Zimbardo found out just how much prisoners disliked experiment - Approval for study was given from Office of Naval Research, Psychology Department and University Committee of Human Experimentation, committee also didnt anticipate prisoners extreme reactions that were to follow - Alternative Methodologies looked at, that could cause less distress, but didnt give anything suitable that gave desired information - extensive group and debriefing sessions held and all participants returned post experimental questionnaires, several weeks, months and years -benefit gained about society improvements and human behaviour, however suggested US navy not interested in making prisons more human, more interested in using study to train people to cope with stresses of captivity

Answer 3

Form of social influence when individual follows direct order. Person issuing order is often a figure of authority, power to punish if obedient behaviour not forthcoming Example = 6 million people systematically slaughtered on command of Nazis during Hitlers regime Only could be carried out if very large numbers of people obeyed orders, defense of many were that they were just obeying orders - some character defect = germans more obedient

Answer 4

Hitlers Holocaust = basic character deficit = dispositional explanation of behaviour argiung cause of behaviour is by own personality / characteristics Milgram aimed to question dispositional attribution of Nazis, believe that situation led to inhumane events, and anybody in that position would commit same atrocities if in same circumstances and ordered to by authority figure - this is a situational explanation Test germans are different hypothesis, prove holocaust due to dispositional factors of soldiers

Answer 5

Selected pps by advertising male pps take part in a study, learning at Yale = volunteer sampling method 40 male pps, paid 4 dollars an hour, told study based on memory Pp paired with learner, draw fixed, confederate always a learner, real pp always a teacher Mr wallace = learner always = taken into room and had electrodes attached to arms, teacher saw this happening Mr Wallace asked about medical conditions = “other than minor heart condition im fine!” Teacher taken into room containing electric shock generator, from 15V (slight shock), to 375V (danger: severe shock), to 450 (XXX) real pp didnt know this was all fake, thought learner was actually real pp thought shock generator was real would actually give out electric shocks Got one wrong, or nothing at all, pp had to give shock At 180V learner said cant stand pain At 300V learner begged he be released After 315V there was silence When asked if they should continue, or some other indication not to go on, he would be given encouragement to continue, with 4 prods - please continue - experiment requires you continue -absolutely essential you must continue -no other choice, you must go on Prods always in sequence Only if 1 is unsuccessful, could prod 2 be used, participant continued to disobey after 4, experiment was terminated, tone of voice always firm but not impolite

Answer 6

Predicted that 2% of people would shock to highest level, but most would quit very early on Asked 14 psych students early on to predict participants behaviour, students estimated no more than 3% would continue to 450V However all pps continued to 300V, 65% shocked all the way to 450V All 40 went up to 300V, by which after that, 5 refused to continue, 4 more gave one more shock then quit 2 broke off at 330V, 1 at 345V, 1 at 360V, 1 at 375V Total of 14 pps defied experimenter, 26 pps obeyed During study many pps showed signs of nervousness, and tension, pps trembled, sweated, stuttered, bit lips, groaned, dug fingernails into flesh, and typical not exceptional responses 14/40 nervously laughed, was common sign of tension, seemed entirely out of place, even bizarre Full blown uncontrollable seizures observed for 3 pps, and on one occasion pp had violently convulsive seizure, experiment had to be halted (46 year old was v embarrassed) Pps said they are not sadistic, laughter did not mean they enjoyed shocking the learner All pps debriefed at end of study, assured behaviour was entirely normal, all pps sent follow up questionnaire, 84% reported they felt glad to have participated

Answer 7

Normal / ordinary people will obey authority even if actions may be detrimental, thus hypothesis that “Germans are different” was not supported

Answer 8

**Good External Validity** - seemed to lack, as carried out in lab -still shows relationship between authority figure, experimenter and participant milgram argued lab environment mimicked real life situations supported by Hofling et als (1966) study where 21/22 were willing to exceed max dose of drug followed by “Dr Smith of Psychological Department” orders over the phone, nurses didnt even know if it was genuine - give 20mg of Astrofen drug when max dose is 10mg -said he was in a hurry, would sign drug authorisation when hes back in 10 mins Rank and Jacobson (1977) queried fact that nurses had no knowledge of drug involved, no opportunity to seek advice from peers or anyone more important, they replicated experiment, administer valium at 3 times drug dose, telephone instruction from real, known doctor, nurses able to consult before proceeding, only 2/18 conditions prepared medication as required Supporting replication (La Jeue De La Mort) - doc about reality tv, pps believed they were on show called La Zone Xtreme - paid to give (fake) electric shocks to other pps, that were actors, ordered by presenter - 80% pps delivered max dose of electric shocks, 460V, to apparently unconscious man -showed anxiety, nervousness, nail biting, nervous laughter, replication supports original conclusions, about obedience to authority, demonstrating findings not just one off chance occurrence

Answer 9

Low internal Validity - whether procedure used in experiment is measuring what it is supposed to measure - Orne and Holland (1968) believed that pps just showing demand characteristics, because didnt really believe in set-up, guessed not really giving electric shocks to learner, meaning study not measuring what it intends to measure, and therefore lacks internal validity - Perry’s (2013), research confirms this, as many of the pps, when listening to tapes of the experiment, expressed doubts of the shocks being real or not Ethical Issues - Baumrind (1964) extremely critical of way Milgram used deception - eg. Not told that learner is a confederate, told that there was random selection, and thought that shocks were real, therefore didnt know full nature of experiment, couldnt give full consent, and thought that deception was betrayal of trust, damage reputation of psychologists and research - made experiment v difficult to withdraw - risk of long term harm, put in extreme stress situation, thought that they killed someone or seriously injured someone - defense : 84% very glad to have participated in post experiment questionnaires, 1.3% sorry to have taken part 74% said they learnt something of personal importance majority not psychologically harmed, and meaning that experiment was worthwhile, and one year on, they were interviewed, judged to have sustained no psych harm

Answer 10

Investigated situational variables that affect obedience including proximity and location, as investigated by Milgram and uniform Proximity - tested how the effect of how physically close the learner and teacher are to each other affects obedience, or near to the victim - 1st variation, teacher and learner in adjoining rooms, so teacher hear but not see learner, caused obedience rates to drop from 65% to 40% - 2nd variation= force learners hand on electroshock plate, and in same room, when refused to answer a q,in touch proximity the obedience rate dropped to 30% -3rd variation = remote instruction, the experimenter was giving instructions over the phone, and outcome was further decrease to 20.5% Location: -milgram changed location from yale to run down building - obedience rates fell from 65% - 47.5% Still quite high level of obedience, but less than 65% Uniform: - original baseline study = experimenter = grey / white labcoat = symbol of his authority - experimenter called away in variation, due to phone call at start of experiment, and ordinary member of public, (confederate) in everyday clothes took over, obedience level dropped to 20%, lowest of all variations

Answer 11

**Research Support** - other studies showed effect of influence of situational variables -such as Bickman (1974), 3 male researchers gave orders to 153 pedestrians random, and were dressed in a suit, milkmans uniform, or guards uniform Gave various orders = pick up bag on street, or nodding give dime to confederate - obedience rates highest in guard (80%), then milk man or civilian (40%), aupports milgrams conclusion that uniform conveys authority of wearer, likely to produce obedience Cross - cultural replications - have been replicated in other cultures too Miranda et al (1981) found high obedience rates, in spanish students (90%), suggest milgrams conclusions about obedience, not just linked to american males, but females and other cultures too Milgram did experiment on american females, found same response - however, Smith and Bond (1998), pointed out milgrams study replicated in well developed societies, spain and australia, cannot apply to all countries, developing countries have diff cultures and norms and values, findings about proximity and location may not apply across world Good variable control - especially for proximity and location -highly controlled, only altered one variable, kept rest constant, see effect on obedience, replicated on 1000 pp in total, not only valid results, but also replicable -can draw stronger conclusions from results

Answer 12

Lack of internal validity - orne and holland (1968) criticises milgrams original study, on grounds that pps worked out whole procedure was a set up and thus fake, pps may have realised, by the 4 prompts used, and variations of milgrams where experimenter replaced by member of public, obedience fell to 20%, even milgram realised, that experiment was contrived, worked out truth, 35% not shocked to full voltage, 450V Criticism, we do not know if real obedience occurred, or if demand characteristics, saw through deception and acted accordingly Obedience alibi - milgrams findings support situational variables, as an explanation of obedience However David Mandel (1998) argues that using these variables almost makes them an excuse or “alibi” for evil and bad behaviour, and sees it as a feeble excuse to survivors of the holocaust, that the atrocity was due to situational factors beyond their control

social influence L1-7 Flashcards

(36 cards)