1.1 - Social Influence (set B - Social Roles,Obedience and Explanations Of Obedience) Flashcards
What was the aim of the Stanford prison experiment?
To investigate how readily people would conform to new roles by observing how quickly people would adopt the roles of guards or prisoners
Outline the procedure of the Stanford prison experiment?
- mock prison set up in basement of Stanford university - male volunteers physiologically screened and randomly assigned role of prisoner or guard
- prisoners unexpectedly arrested at home and put through introduction procure upon arrival of prison (humiliated,given smocks and allocated numbers)
- guards were given uniforms, clubs and reflective sunglasses (prevent eye contact)
- lasted 6 days - planned to be 2 weeks
- zimbardo acted as superintendent
Outline the findings of the Stratford prison experiment?
- 5 prisoners had to be released early because of their extreme reactions - symptoms appeared after just 2 days
- guards became increasingly abusive and humiliating - ordered prisoners to do degrading activities which they complied with
- both roles appeared at times to forget that this was a study and that they were being watched - still conformed to their roles
What can be concluded from the Stratford prison experiment - give 2 points?
- prison environment was an important factor in creating the guards brutal behaviour
- people will readily conform to social roles they are expected to play - especially if the roles are strong stereotyped - including zimbardo who also conformed (made deals with the prisoners for information in exchange he would tell the guards to go easy on them)
Give 2 criticisms of the Stanford prison experiment - focus on ethical problems and demand characteristics?
- many ethical concerns participants were subject to psychological harm (violates protection from harm,right to withdraw and lack of fully informed consent)
- some argued that behaviour of participants was a consequence of demand characteristics - they guessed how the experimenter wanted them to behave rather than conformity to roles
Explain contradicting evidence to the idea that the guards behaviour was an automatic consequence of them embracing their role?
Others have pointed out that the guards behaviour varied (from fully sadistic to a few ‘good guards’ - who did not degrade or harass the prisoners)
- suggests that the guards chose how to behave rather than blindly conforming to their social role, as suggested by zimbardo
Outline 2 strengths of the Stanford prison experiment?
- resulted in prison reforms across the US - was very influential
- emotionally stable individuals (who passed detailed screening) were chosen and assigned roles at random - removed any bias and individual personality differences - no one was more susceptible than others
Outline 2 weakness of the Stratford prison experiment?
- others suggested participants were play acting rather than conforming to a role - one guard said he based his actions on a movie character (based behaviour on stereotypes) - zimbardo disagreed, he found that 90% of conversations were about prison life
- some accused zimbardo of exaggerating the power of the situation - only a minority of the guards behaved badly, 1/3 applied rules fairly and the rest aided the prisoners
outline the real life application of zimbardos research?
- believed his findings could explain the behaviour of the American soldiers in Abu Ghraib - suggested that if you put ‘good’ people in bad situations they do ‘’bad’ things
- zimbardo asked to be expert witness in trials of high ranking US soldiers
What was the aim of Milgram study?
To find out wether ordinary Americans would obey an unjust order from a person in authority to inflict pain on another person even if it goes against their morals (believe the Germans were different to the rest, in the way that they followed orders during the holocaust)
- conducted a controlled observation in Yale university (well respected and prestigious)
Outline the procedure of Milgram study?
- 40 male volunteers
- confederate (‘learner’) set up in a room, recording would play after each shock to act as if he was in pain
- participant playing role of ‘teacher’ - would administer an electric shock every time the learning got it wrong, shock increments went up in 15V to 450V
- other confederate ‘experimenter’ would urge participant to keep going when he hesitated
Outline the findings from Milgrams study?
- all participants went to 300V
- 65% went up to the full 450V
- most participants found the procedure very stressful, displaying signs of extreme anxiety - although they distended verbally they continued to obey the researcher
What can be concluded from milgrams study - give 3 points?
- under certain circumstances, most people will obey orders and go against their conscience
- when people occupy a subordinate position in a dominance hierarchy they become liable to lose feelings of empathy (blind obedience)
- atrocities can largely be explained in terms of pressure to obey a powerful authority
Outline and explain 2 criticisms of milgrams study?
- study violated ethical concerns - specifically the potential harm and distress the participants were subject to - also were not informed fully about the procedure
- others have claimed it lacks experimental (internal) validity, participants were going along with the act and appearing to be distressed to please the experimenter, questioned wether the shocks were real
Give three situational variables investigated by Milgram on obedience?
- role of proximity
- location
- uniform