(BRB) social psychology - obedience (T1) Flashcards
define what social psychology is
- investigates aspects of human behaviour that involve the individuals relationship to other persons, groups and society including cultural influences on behaviour
what are the 3 key assumptions of social psychology
- the approach assumes that other people can affect out behaviour, thought processes and emotions
- being groups in society affects behaviour, responding differently to people depending on what group there in
- the roles that we play in society also affects our behaviour
define groups and examples
gender, ethnicity, nationality, school membership, club membership
give examples of roles
expectations, responsibilities and behaviours we adopt in certain situations
what is social influence
when an individuals behaviour, attitudes or emotions are affected by someone else
what is obedience
a form of social influence, means obeying direct orders from someone in authority
what is compliance
going along with what someone says while not necessarily agreeing with it
what is dissenting
where someone’s orders are rejected
what is internalising
means that you obey with agreement
what is conformity
means that you adopt the behaviours & attitudes to those around you
give a real world example of when obedience can be bad
- ww2 soldiers in concentration camps
- Vietnam war my lar
what does autonomy mean
acting out of ones own free will
what was the inspiration for milgrims research
- testing the idea that the Germans were different to other people by carrying out orders os mass genocide
describe Milgrims pilot study and the results
- he described the experimental situation to a sample of psychiatrists, students and middle class adults
- he asked them to predict how 100 hypothetical participants would behave
- results were that most would stop before 150v and only 4% would continue to 450v
what was the aim of milgrims original study
- to see if volunteer participants would be similarly obedient to inhumane orders
describe the procedure of the experiment in milgrims original study
- volunteer sampling
- 40 male participants
- mix of age, occupation and education levels
- were paid 4$ for the day
- took place at yale uni
- the confederate was always the learner (rigged)
- teacher could hear but not see learner
what were the participant’s told the experiments was about upon arrival in milgrims original study
- aimed to see how punishment affects learning
how many volts was the teacher given to show that the shock machine was genuine in milgrims original study
- 45 v
what was the task that the teacher was asked to do in milgrims original study and what was the punishment for wrong answers
- asked to read a series of word pairs to the learner
- punishment was an electric shock starting at 15v and increasing by 15v
- shocks had labels like danger, and then XXX for last 2
at how many volts did the learner in milgrims original study protest at
- 300v by banging on the wall and then didnt respond after
what were the standardised prods in milgrims original study if the teacher asked for advice or complained
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
was there a debriefing process in milgrims original study
- yes
- all interviewed using open questions and attitude scales
- procedures were take to ensure they left in a state of well being
what is the quantitative data collected from milgrims original study
- 100% of participants obeyed to 300v
- 14 stopped before 450v
- 26 (65%) obeyed to the max of 450
what is the qualitative data collected in milgrims original study
- many participants showed visible signs of distress
- many twitched and laughed nervously
- many vocally protested by saying “oh i cant go on with this” or “i dont think this is very humane”
what are the 2 main conclusions in milgrims original study, what were the 2 states that milgrim found
- social influence is strong
-people will obey orders even when it causes them personal distress - autonomous - act according to there own values and conscience
- agentic state- act as an agent for another person, supressing their own values and not taking responsibility for their own actions
how generalisable is Milgrims original study (GRAVE)
- only used 40 men so ay not be representative of the whole target population of america
- used men with different educations, occupation, and ages so it increases generalisability and more representative
what is the reliability like in Milgrims original study (GRAVE)
- standardised procedure
- standardised prods
- very high reliability and replicability
how applicable is Milgrims original study (GRAVE)
- applicable to the nazi trial; and my lai massacre
- obedience use- good for certain areas in society e.g police
- debate of social control
- used to hold authority figures to account
what is the validity like in Milgrims original study (GRAVE)
- had physical signs of distress which shows they belied the situation they were in
- many had vocal complaints showing a lack of demand characteristics and high experimental realism
- artificial setting and task
what are the ethics like in Milgrims original study (GRAVE)
- no right to withdraw
- deception was used
- broke guideline to protect participant’s
- adhered to debriefing of participants at the end of the study
what are the 3 variations of Milgrims original study that we need to know
- variation 7- telephonic instructions
- variation 10- rundown office block
- variation 13- ordinary man giving instructions
what is the aim and procedure of milgrims variation 7
aim- to see if having the experimenter physically in the room has an effect on obedience rates
procedure- instructions were initially given face to face, the experimenter then left the room and gave instructions over the phone
what is the results and conclusions of milgrims variation 7
results- participants giving the max voltage dropped from 65% to 22.5% and some chose to repeatedly administer low voltages
conclusions- having the experimenter out of the room decreases obedience rates
what is the aim and procedure of milgrims variation 10
aim- to see if the setting affected obedience rates
procedure- setting was a rundown office building in an industrial side of town, disassociated from yale uni and said it was for research associates of Bridgeport
what are the results and conclusions of milgrims variation 10
results - 47.5% gave the max voltage
conclusions- less reputable setting reduced the legitimacy of the study
what is the aim and procedure of milgrims variation 13
aim- does authority and status of the experimenter affect obedience
procedure- 2 confederates and 1 participant, experimenter received rigged call and left and told them to carry on, didn’t mention what level shock to give
what are the results and conclusions of milgrims variation 13
results- only 20% gave max voltage
conclusions- authority or status of the experiment does affect obedience rates
what is agency theory
- milgrim suggested that peoples tendency to obey people has a useful function as it helps to keep society running smoothly as people abide by the rules instead of acting independently
- agency theory suggests the 2 ways of acting are in the autonomous and agentic state
how does milgrim explain suggest that the agentic state can be explained
- through evolution as it could be a survival strategy
- it can also be learned through childhood with parents and in schools
what is moral strain
- when they feel that their obedient behaviour is wrong and goes against there moral values
how can one reduce their moral strain
- displacing their responsibility by shifting into the agentic state
- or by dissenting
evaluation of milgrims agency theory of obedience (evidence)
+ supports the concept of moral strain as there is evidence of distress
+ supported by other research e.g hofling et al demonstrated that nurses would follow doctors orders
- lacks direct evidence as its an internal mental process so it cant be directly observed
- the theory is more of a description than an explanation, shows us that people obey authority figures but not why
evaluation of milgrims agency theory of obedience (methodology)
+ studies use standardised procedures so can be replicated
+ the theory explains the different levels of obedience found in the variations of the original study
- the methods used lack mundane realism meaning the theory lacks ecological validity and doesn’t generalise to life outside of the lab
evaluation of milgrims agency theory of obedience (applications)
+ explains real life events such as the obedience to authority shown by US soldiers during Vietnam war
+ studies from different cultures support agency theory e.g meeus and raajmaker found that Dutch participants would harass a job applicant due to obedience
- theory does not explain individual differences
evaluation of milgrims agency theory of obedience (alternative theory)
- social impact theory
what is social impact theory
- how likely we are to be influenced by others and suggests that the presence of others causes changes in a person
what is the target and what is the source in social impact theory
- target- the person being impacted upon
- source- the person doing the influencing
what does social impact theory state that the likelihood that a person will respond to social influence will increase with
- strength -> status authority and age
- immediacy
- number
what is the multiplication of impact
when increase strength, immediancy and number has a multiplicative effect up to a cut of point
what is division of impact
- when an increase is strength, immediacy and number causes social influence to be weaker
evaluation of social impact theory (evidence for)
- the theory is supported by research e.g milgrim and latane provide evidence for the impact of strength, immediacy and number
- milgrim variation 7 shows that proximity is an important factor in obedience
evaluation of social impact theory (evidence against)
- theory ignores individual differences, does not explain why some of us are more resistant to social impact and some are more resistant
- does not explain why people are influenced by others, just under what conditions they are more likely to be influenced
evaluation of social impact theory (methodology)
+ both lab and field experiments were used, this increases the scientific credibility as standardised procedures were used meaning cause and effect can be inferred
- by analysing peoples obedience behaviour using a mathematical formula could be considered reductionist
evaluation of social impact theory (applications)
+ because it uses a mathematical formula, the theory is useful because it can predict how people will behave in certain conditions
- the theory is limited with thw type of social situation it is able to explain, it cant predict when 2 equal groups impact on one another
what are the 3 aspects pf personality as a source of individual difference in obedience
- locus of control
- authoritarianism
- empathy
describe what locus of control is and give the relevant research
description- the extent people feel they are in control of their own lives and situation split into 2 sections called internal and external locus
- research- rotter (1966), milgrims research
describe what authoritarianism is and give the relevant research
- personality trait that is characterised by hostility towards people of a diff race, social group, age or sexuality
- research- Theodore Adorno with F-scale, Milgram + elm (1966)
describe what empathy is and give the relevant research
- personality trait which could influence obedience as they understand others feelings well
- research - burger (2009)
describe what gender is and give the relevant research
- individual difference which may have an effect on obedience
- blass (1999)
what are the 4 situational factors affecting obedience and dissent
- momentum of compliance
- proximity
- status of authority figure
- personal responsibility
what is momentum of compliance as a situational factor affecting obedience and dissent
-starts of making small and trivial requests
- no anxiety to participant
- they commit the participant to the experiment
- feel duty bound
- increases voltage by 15
what is proximity as a situational factor affecting obedience and dissent
- closer authority figure, higher obedience rate
- closer victim lower the obedience
- obedience close to 100% when learner could not be heard or seen
- proximity is a buffer
what is status of an authority figure as a situational factor affecting obedience and dissent
- obedience was stronger when authority figure was seen as legitimate
- yale uni compared to Bridgeport
- ordinary man and high status researcher
what is personal responsibility as a situational factor affecting obedience and dissent
- obedience was strongest when they felt someone else was responsible for the harm
- when they had to sign a contract stating that they were taking part from their own free will and the uni was responsible obedience rates fell to 40%
what was the aim and procedure of burgers baseline condition
aim- to replicate Milgram’s OG study with correct ethics and see how obedience rates differ
procedure- volunteer sampling, 2 screenings to eliminate any participants who could be seen as a threat or in danger from the study
what were the results and conclusions of burgers baseline condition
results- practically the same as milgrams OG study however questions asked for validity as he stopped at the PONR (150v)
conclusions- the screening process may have removed people who would have affected the results, gender had no affect in obedience levels
what was the aim and procedure of burgers modelled refusal condition
aim- to see how obedience rates changed after social support for the idea of exiting the study early
procedure- everything was the same as baseline except for an extra confederate who stopped at 90v
what were the results and conclusions of burgers modelled refusal condition
results- very similar to his own baseline, more people were obedient than not
conclusions- the 2 confederate system may have triggered a “me vs him” scenario within the participants head
evaluation of contemporary study burger (2009) (GENERALISABILITY)
- during the screening process participants were excluded based on factors like mental state or if they had attended 2 or more psychology uni classes which reduces generalisability
- the sample has a range of ages, ethnicities and genders which increases generalisability
evaluation of contemporary study burger (2009)
(RELIABILITY)
- the study uses standardised procedures which increases reliability
- this was also a replication study so we can assume that replicability is high
evaluation of contemporary study burger (2009)
(APPLICATION)
- it entails that orders fromma position of authority (as well as other factors) have a great affect on obedience rates
evaluation of contemporary study burger (2009)
(VALIDITY)
- the study was conducted in a lab setting which reduces validity
- however it does measure what it claims to and results have been attained previously
- burger controlled extraneous variables like students who had already studies Milgram
evaluation of contemporary study burger (2009)
(ETHICS)
- compared to Milgram’s study it is very ethical as it allows the
- right to withdraw
- provides informed consent
- provides an instant debrief
- however still includes deception
