Bocchiaro Flashcards
What was he looking at that contrasted Milgram
disobedience to unjust authority
aims?
to put participants in a scenario where they had the choice to obey/disobey/whistleblow rather than just ask what they’d do
sample
-recruited by flyers in the campus cafeteria of VU University in Amsterdam
-offered €7/course credit
-149 took part (96 females and 53 males)
-mean age 20.8
procedure (pt 1)
-participants were met by a male Dutch researcher who was formally dressed with a stern demeanor
-were told a fake cover story about what the study was actually about & asked to give names of other students who could take part
fake cover story
-Investigating effects of sensory deprivation on brain function
-Recently conducted an experiment on 6 participants who spent time completely isolated, in Rome, unable to hear anything
-Was traumatic: all people panicked, their cognitive abilities were impaired temporarily, some experienced visual and auditory hallucinations.
-2 participants asked them to stop but they didn’t because it would have implied collecting invalid data
-In interviews majority said it was a frightening experience.
-Aim to replicate this study
-There are currently no data on young people, but some scientists think their brain is more sensitive to negative effects
procedure (pt2)
- told to write statement to convince students they named to take part in the sensory deprivation study (could include extra work/money if they do so)
-also mentions the study is under review by an Ethics committee
procedure (pt3)
-P then taken to a room with a computer to write their statement
-the room also included forms for the ethics committee which participants could use to report the study for ethical breaches by completing and placing in a mailbox
-were left alone in room for 7 minutes
what were the three possible responses?
obedient (write statement)
disobedient (refuse to write statement)
whistle-blower (report the study to ethics committee)
what’s an open whistleblower
Participants refuse to write a statement and report the study (they are OPEN about their disapproval)
what’s a closed whistleblower?
Participants write a statement but also report the study for ethical breaches (they are being secretive about their disapproval)
obedient results (main)
76.5% of participants went through and wrote a statement
disobedient results (main)
14.1% of participants refused to write a statement
whistleblower results (main)
9.4% of participants reported the study to the ethics committee
3.4% open
6% closed
what was the comparison group
138 participants asked to imagine they were in the scenario and report what they think they would do so could compare the results.
results for comparison group
Obedient - 3.6%
Disobedient - 31.9%
Whistleblower - 64.5%
what were the 2 personality inventories
HEXACO & SVO
What’s the HEXACO test
measures 6 major dimensions of personality:
● Honesty-Humility
● Emotionality
● Extraversion
● Agreeableness
● Conscientiousness
● Openness to Experience
what’s the SVO test
The Social Value Orientation (SVO) measures preferences of outcomes for oneself and others:
● Prosocial Orientation
● Individualistic Orientation
● Competitive Orientation
personality test results
no new information about the personality of obedient people, but did reveal that whistleblowers tended to have more faith.
how was the sample biased?
Only students
Most likely young (mean
age 20.8yrs)
From Amsterdam, The Netherlands
how wasn’t the sample biased?
Both male and female participants
Not all participants would have been from The Netherlands
how was the study ethica
Students volunteered to take part (gave consent) as well as after the real study was revealed
Participants were given a full debrief about the sensory deprivation study not being real
how wasn’t the study ethical
Students were deceived about a fake study
Students may have felt stressed by putting their peers in a harmful scenario OR felt guilty if they were obedient
construct validity
- may not have actually opposed the sensory deprivation study
- they may have wanted it to be conducted
- they may have suggested names of people they didn’t like to take part
ecological validity
Bocchiaro said the situation students were put in was realistic (suggesting other pupils for another study).
population validity
Both male and female participants were used but they were on average quite young.
internal reliability
The procedure was standardised (time given to write the statement, fake cover story given etc) so could be easily replicated again
external reliability
There was 149 students so this should be enough to establish a consistent effect
situational
-presence of a perceived legitimate authority figure (the experimenter in a lab coat) made them obey
-was suggested if they comply they may get more money in the future
individual
Faith was found as a characteristic that was found more in whistleblowers
similarities to milgrams study
Participants were paid to take part
Both studies took place within university settings
differences to milgrams study
Studies were conducted in different countries
The gender mix of participants
how has it changed our understanding of the key theme of “responses to people in authority”
Tells us that people are just as obedient in The Netherlands as they are in USA.
how has it NOT changed our understanding of the key theme of “responses to people in authority”
As the results were very similar (most people are obedient) it hasn’t really told us anything new.
how has it changed our understanding of individual diversity
Investigated the role of personality
characteristics (e.g faith) on obedience and whistleblowing BUT there weren’t any significant findings apart from faith
how has it changed our understanding of social diversity
It investigated males and females
BUT found very similar results
how has it changed our understanding of cultural diversity
was carried out in the Netherlands not the US but found very similar results
