SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Question 1

What were the aims of Milgrams experiment?

Answer 1

Investigate what levels of obedience would be shown by Ps when asked by an authority figure, even where the commands would breach the moral code that an individual should not hurt another person against his will

Question 2

What was the sample for Milgrams study?

Answer 2

40 males Ps aged between 20-50 years
From New Haven (obtained through a newspaper advert-volunteer)
Range of occupations (engineers, teachers, etc)
Paid $4.50

Question 3

What is the word for an all male sample?

Answer 3

Andocentric

Question 4

What is the word for an all female sample?

Answer 4

Gynocentric

Question 5

Strengths of Milgrams study

Answer 5

Volunteer sample
Rich in Ps=quicker

Less likely to have sample attrition (dropping out)
They are being paid and they have volunteered
Range of occupations=increase in population validity

Question 6

Weaknesses of Milgrams study

Answer 6

Self-selected//similar group of people + all males (andocentric) so can’t see female obedience

They were deceived (they were testing obedience not memory)=unethical

Question 7

What were the prods used by the experimenter in Milgrams study?

Answer 7

1. Please continue
2. The experiment requires that you continue
3. It is absolutely essential that you continue
4. You have no other choice, you must go on

Question 8

Simplified procedure for Milgram

Answer 8

1. Tell Ps they are taking part in a study for memory, locate them role as ‘teacher’
2. Both Ps given a 45V shock, then separate teacher from learner
3. Teacher would ask Q and if answered wrong shock administered (predetermined response played)
4. As shock increases, intensity of response increases
5. 4 prods used by experimenter to encourage teacher. Teacher was debriefed after

Question 9

Quantitative results gathered by Milgram

Answer 9

100% of Ps shocked ‘learner’ to 300V

65% of Ps went up to 450V (no response from learner)

Question 10

PEC evaluation of Milgram

Answer 10

P-main strength was the amount of control he was able to administer
E-eg; Ps beloved they were being randomly assigned to either ‘teacher’ or ‘learner’, believed they were actually administrating shocks, all used the same apparatus, had the same prods
C-due to this control, the study has high reliability because procedure was consistent

Question 11

Aims of Bocchiaro’s study

Answer 11

Investigate rates of obedience, disobedience and whistle-blowing in the situation of no physical violence was involved- but instructions were ethically wrong

Question 12

Bocchiaro’s method

Answer 12

Initially he conducted 8 pilot studies, involving 92 Ps

Question 13

What was the sample for Bocchiaro?

Answer 13

Undergraduates from the University of Amsterdam
Initially tested 92 students from here and then a further 149 students were tested for main study
Ratio of women to men=96:53

Question 14

Results from Bocchiaro

Answer 14

-Only 3.6% of Ps in comparison group believed they would obey and 64% beloved they would blow the whistle. The remaining 31.9% beloved they would disobey

Question 15

What are strengths of Bocchiaro using a lab experiment?

Answer 15

P-repeatable
E-less ex. variables (alone without distractions from other Ps standardised instructions
C-increase in internal validity

Question 16

Evaluation of Bocchiaro

Strengths and weaknesses

Answer 16

Strength:
P-quantitative data, comparable
E-he could compare predictions of disobedience with actual results can compare statistics
C-strength because you can make objective conclusions to who blew the whistle

Weakness:
P-lack of qualitative data
E-by just using data, unable to identify why people with a deeper faith are more obedient
C-weakness because there is little info to explain behaviour

Question 17

What is a similarity between Milgram and Bocchiaro?

Answer 17

Quantitative data
M-65% males went to 450V
B-76.5% obeyed and only 9.4% blew the whistle
Can create an objective conclusion

Question 18

What was a difference between Milgram and Bocchiaro?

Answer 18

B=more ethical
M-high in stress as Ps ordered to inflict harm on others, and by having a person of authority in their company the Ps were more likely to comply
However B did not order Ps to inflict harm and were not encouraged to carry on by prods

Question 19

Aims of Piliavins study

Answer 19

1. Test bystander behaviour in a real life setting (New York subway)
2. To see the effect of the type of victim on helping behaviour
3. See the effect of modelling on help of behaviour
4. See the effect of group size (diffusion of responsibility) on helping behaviour

Question 20

What was the method used by Piliavin and independent variables?

Answer 20

Study is a field experiment (IV still manipulated but in natural setting)
IV:
-type of victim (drunk or cane)
-race of victim
-size of witnessing group (naturally occurring)

Question 21

What dependent variables were used by Piliavin?

Answer 21

• number of people who helped
• time taken to help
• gender
• location of helpers

Question 22

What was the sample for Piliavin?

Answer 22

4500 men and women with varying ages

Racial comparison=45% black and 55% white

Question 23

Procedure of Piliavin

Answer 23

Each trial had 2 female observers and 2 male observer- one acting as victim, one as model

Question 24

What were the four conditions for Piliavin?

Answer 24

Critical area- early
-model stood in critical area and helped after 70 seconds
Critical area- late
-model stood in CA and helped after 150 seconds
Adjacent area- early
-model stood in adjacent area and helped after 70 seconds
Adjacent area- late
-model stood in AA and helped after 150 seconds

Question 25

What were the results from Piliavin?

Answer 25

- Cane victim received spontaneous help 95% of the time compared to drunk victim 50% - Overall cane victim was helped 100%of the time, whereas drunk=81% - 90%of helpers were males suggesting women are less likely to help in emergency situations - No diffusion of responsibility was found

Question 26

Evaluation of Piliavin

Answer 26

Strengths: P-field experiment, natural setting E-NY subway C-ecological validity-can be generalised to other real world settings P-qual. and quantitative data E-eg: gender of helpers (90%) and comments 'wish I could help' C-explains who helps and why=increases usefulness Weaknesses: P-cannot control ex. variables E-age may affects how someone responds C-affects DV and lacks face validity P-breaks ethical guidelines E-consent not gained as on NY subway for a short period of time C-justified because a decrease in demand Cs=increase in face validity

Question 27

Aims of Levine's study

Answer 27

1. Establish if the tendency of people to help strangers is universal or dependent on characteristics of the city 2. Test whether the helping of strangers varies between cultures 3. Investigate whether the particular characteristics of a community, such as city size, are associated with the tendency to help strangers

Question 28

What was the method for Levine?

Answer 28

Study was both file and quasi and cross cultural (as comparing people in a range of countries) =increases population validity However it is expensive to travel/employ world wide

Question 29

What was the sample for Levine?

Answer 29

23 countries, such as Austria, Brazil and China. Total number of Ps= 1,198, done through opportunity sampling Participants not tested include children, elderly, and visible physical disabilities

Question 30

What was the procedure for Levine?

Answer 30

To reduce ex. variables the experimenters were all male and didn't speak to the Ps. Dropped pen- second person to cross line=participant (same for every condition) DV-if Ps gives pen back or calls to experimenter Hurt leg- DV=offered to help or beginning to help[ with no verbal offer Helping blind person cross street- DV=if Ps helped cross the street or at least informed experimenter that lights green

Question 31

What are community variables and what were they in Levine's study?

Answer 31

Variables that can't change - population size (taken from United Nations Demographic yearbook) - economic prosperity - cultural values (simpatia or non-simpatia) - pace of life

Question 32

What were results from Levine's study?

Answer 32

- mean rate of helping for simpatia countries was 82.87% compared to 65.87% in non-simpatia countries - helping was not found to be related to population size - as economic wealth increased, help decreased=negative correlation of -0.43

Question 33

Conclusions from Levine's study

Answer 33

Helping behaviour in non-emergency situations is not universal but varies between cities Poorer the country=higher level of helps

Question 34

Strength of Levine's study

Answer 34

P-strength=field ex.=increase in ecological validity E-in this study, non emergency situations were tested in real life situations in the largest cities from the 23 collected countries (including Austria and China) C-this means we can generalise results to predict that people would or wouldn't be likely to show the same levels of helping behaviour around the cities that were tested when someone else requires help in non emergency situations

Question 35

What was an issue with Bocchiaros sample?

Answer 35

P-not a balance between men and women E-96 women, 53 men C-unable to collect an even amount of data for a comparison

Question 36

Procedure of Bocchiaros study

Answer 36

- Paid 7 euros or course credit 1. Arrived alone and met by stern experimenter, said research was about sensory deprivation 2. Each P was instructed to write a statement to convince other other students to take part in the sensory deprivation procedure - told they needed to use at least two words from choice of 'exciting', 'incredible', 'great' and 'superb' - told not to mention any negative effects of sensory deprivation 3. Offered regular paid work in the future 4. Ps taken into second room and left in room to compose their statement - if P believed the study was unethical they, therefore had the option of completing a form and putting it in the mailbox

Question 37

What was assessed in Bocchiaros study?

Answer 37

Obedience/disobedience-whether or not Ps composed the statement Whistle-blowing-whether they competed an ethics form and mailed it