Bocchiaro et al. (2012) Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What was the aim of Bocchiaro’s study?

A

To investigate disobedience and whistle blowing an unethical study.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

How were the participants recruited and what did they receive for taking part?

A

The participants were recruited by flyers in the campus cafeteria of VU University in Amsterdam. They received either 7 euros or course credit for taking part.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What happened in the first room of the experiment?

A
  • Participants were greeted by a male Dutch experimenter, formally dressed with a stern demeanour.
  • Experimenter then gave cover story about an unethical study and asked participants to write a statement to convince fellow students to take part in unethical study
  • Experimenter then left the room for 3 minutes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What happened in the second room of the experiment?

A
  • Participants assigned to computers to write the statement - told to be enthusiastic and to not mention sensory deprivation
  • Experimenter left room for 7 minutes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What could be found in the second room of the experiment?

A

A mailbox and a Research Committee form which participants could use to ‘whistle-blow’ the study. Told to report to Human Ethics Committee.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What happened when the participants returned to the first room?

A

Two personality inventories (the HEXACO-PI-R test, and a measure of Social Value Orientation (SVO)) were administered. After this, participants then debriefed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Outline the participants of Bocchiaro’s study.

A
  • 149 undergraduate student
  • From VU University in Amsterdam
  • 96 women and 53 men
  • Originally 160 participants but 11 removed because of suspiciousness about nature of study
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What were the two types of whistle-blowers?

A

Open whistle blowers - reported the study and left their name.
Anonymous whistle blowers - reported the study anonymously.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

How many participants were asked to predict the results?

A

A separate 138 students from VU University in Amsterdam.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What did the participants predict they would do in the situation of the study?

A

3.6% predicted they would obey ,31.9% predicted they would disobey and 64.5% predicted they would whistle-blow.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What did the participants predict the average student at their university would do?

A

They predicted that 18.8% would obey, 43.9% would disobey and 37.3% would whistle-blow.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What were the actual results of the study?

A

76.5% obeyed, 14.1% disobeyed and 9.4% whistle-blew (6% were anonymous whistle-blowers and 3.4% were open whistle-blowers).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What did Bocchiaro find about the personality tests?

A

No statistically significant differences were found in any of the six personality factors.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the main conclusions of the results?

A

The main conclusion is that behaving in a moral manner is challenging for people, even when this reaction appears to the observers as the simplest path to follow - it is hard to whistle-blow.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly