Bocchiaro Et Al

Question 1

What is the area of the study

Answer 1

Social

Question 2

What was the aim

Answer 2

• To investigate the rates of obedience, disobedience and whistle- blowing in a situation where no physical violence was involved but where it was clear that the instructions were ethically wrong
• to investigate the accuracy of people’s estimates of obedience, disobedience and whistle- blowing in this situation
• to investigate the role of dispositional factors in obedience, disobedience and whistle- blowing

Question 3

Research method

Answer 3

Lab based study

Question 4

Sample: how many ppts were in the experimental group ? And how were they recruited

Answer 4

149 undergraduate students at Uni Amsterdam
Mean age = 20.8
Recruited by flyers in the uni cafe

Question 5

Sample: how many ppts were in the comparison group? And what were they asked to do?

Answer 5

138 student from VU uni
They were provided with a detailed description of the experimental setting. They were then asked “what would you do?” And “ what would the average student at your university do?”

Question 6

How many pilot tests were carried out ?

Answer 6

8

Question 7

How many students/ ppts where used in the pilot tests

Answer 7

92

Question 8

Why did bocchiaro do 8 pilot tests before the main study?

Answer 8

The pilot tests were used to ensure the procedure was credible and morally accepted
These tests also served to standardise the experimenter- authority behaviour throughout the experimental period.
These ppts said the procedure was both believable and ethical

Question 9

Procedure: how was this study made ethical ?

Answer 9

Ppts were informed about what their task was, about the potential benefits/ risks of participation, and about their right to withdraw at any time with no penalty
They were also assured confidentiality of the information collected

Question 10

How were the ppts greeted

Answer 10

Each ppt was greeted in the Laboratory by a male experimenter who was formally dressed and had a stern demeanour

Question 11

What did the experimenter ask each ppt to provide ?

Answer 11

The experimenter asked each ppt to provide a few names of fellow students then presented the cover story

Question 12

What is “the cover story”

Answer 12

The experimenter and a colleague were investigating the effects of sensory deprivation in brain function of 6 ppts
They had spent some time completely isolated, unable to see or hear anything

Question 13

What effect did the cover story have on the 6 ppts?(without seeing or hearing anything in an isolated area)

Answer 13

It had disastrous effects
They all panicked, their cognitive abilities were temporarily impaired, some experienced visual and auditory hallucinations
The majority said it had been a frightening experience

Question 14

How many ppts asked 2 stop because of their strong symptoms in the cover story?

Answer 14

2 ppts

They were not allowed to do so because invalid data may then have been collected

Question 15

Why didn’t the experimenters go ahead with replicating the cover story study at the VU university using a sample of college students?

Answer 15

Some scientists thought that their brains may be more sensitive to the negative effects of isolation

Question 16

What were the ppts from the cover story asked to do?

Answer 16

Participants were to write a statement to convince the students they had previously named to participate in the experiment.
Statement would be send to the identified students by mail.

Question 17

We’re participants asked to be enthusiastic when writing their statements ?

Answer 17

Yes, they had to use two adjectives among “exciting” “incredible” “ great” “ superb”
Negative sensory deprivation was not mentioned

Question 18

What could the participants do if they believed the proposed research on sensory deprivation violated ethical norms?

Answer 18

They could anonymously challenge it by putting a form in the mail box
They had a chance to whistleblow

Question 19

How long did the experimenter leave the room to let the ppts reflect on what to do?

Answer 19

3 minutes

Question 20

Where were the students/ ppts then moved to after they’ve reflected” on what to do

Answer 20

They were moved to a second room where there was a computer for them to use to write their statement, a mailbox and the research committee forms

Question 21

The experimenter then told the ppts to begin writing their statements and left the room for how many minutes?

Answer 21

7 minutes

Question 22

What did the experimenter do after the 7 minute interval?

Answer 22

The experimenter returned and invited the participant to follow him back to the first room where she/he was administered Two personality inventories.

Question 23

What were the two personality inventories

Answer 23

1) The HEXACO-PI-R personality test: measures 6 traits: honesty-humility, emotionality, extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience
2) the Decomposed games measure of social values.
This measures the extent to which personal values are oriented towards benefit for all or just for the self

Question 24

How was religiosity measured

Answer 24

Was measured by asking what their religion was, frequency of worship and extent of faith

Question 25

Were the ppts fully informed this second time (the hexagon and the Decomposed games) ?

Answer 25

Ppts were fully debriefed and asked to sign a second consent form, this time fully informed.

Question 26

How long did the sessions of HEXaCO and the decomposed games last?

Answer 26

Approximately 40 mins

Question 27

How was obedience/ disobedience measured ?

Answer 27

By whether or not ppts composed the statement

Question 28

How was whistle- blowing measured ?

Answer 28

By whether they completed an ethics form and mailed it

Question 29

What were the results of the comparison group? (Estimates of own behaviour)

Answer 29

• Only 3.6% indicated that they would obey the experimenter

- Most believed they would either be disobedient (31.9%) or whistleblowers(64.5%)

Question 30

Predictions of behaviour of other typical students at their university

Answer 30

Only 18.8%?thought an average student at VU university would obey, while they believed most other students would disobey (43.9%) whistleblow (37.3%).

Question 31

Experimental group (actual behaviour)

Answer 31

76.5% obeyed the experimenter(n=114) 14.1% disobeyed (n=21) and 9.4%(n=9) blew the whistle
Among whistleblowers: 6% had written a message (anonymous whistleblowers), 3.4% had refused to do so (open whistleblowers)

Question 32

Personality test

Answer 32

Results for individual differences in personality among 3 groups showed no statistically significant differences in any of the six personality factors measured by the HEXACO-PI-R

Question 33

Social values orientation

Answer 33

Showed that “prosocial” and “individualistic” participants were not unequally