Institutionalisation

Question 0

Main 3 situational factors

Answer 0

• status and power
• revenge and retaliation
• Deindividuation and helplessness

Question 1

Assumption of institutional Agg.

Answer 1

‘Bad barrel hypothesis’

Situational factors cause institutional aggression

Question 2

Link 3 situational factors to Abu Graib

Answer 2

Status and power - Lower status night shift reserves were more likely to abuse Iraqi prisoners. They acted aggressively to gain a greater sense of s+p.
Revenge and Retaliation - Seeking revenge for past hurt within an institution. US soldiers could have taken revenge on prisoners for 9/11.
Deindividuation. - loss of sense of individuality in an institution. Responsibility diffusion. Altered soc- prison, group-less responsible, uniform-anonymity.

Question 3

AO3?

Answer 3

Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment

• Men all scored av. on psychological analysis prior to study.
• showed Agg inside institution
• situational factors
  ✔️ - breakdowns = authentic behav.
  X - not real life, lacks mundane realism

Question 4

All behaviour?

Answer 4

Those that resist situational factors?
E.g. Christina Maslach stopped Stanford exp. - NO FREEWILL -

Institutions with sit. Factors but no aggression? SCHOOLS

Question 5

Scientific?

Answer 5

Subjective and hard to measure as people may perceive their experiences within institutions differently.
Lacks objectivity

Question 6

Implications?

Answer 6

We can control aggression by targeting vulnerable institutions. I.e. Dec. deindividuation in prisons, give guards more breaks to ‘escape’ situation.
HOWEVER - as DETERMINED by environment, no room for moral responsibility - justice system wouldn’t work as we couldn’t punish/blame individuals

Question 7

Better explanations?

Answer 7

Parsimonious as only NURTURE. No bio. Factors.
This is challenged by XYY gene. People with this gene are more likely to act aggressively.
Also, is it actually ‘bad apple hypothesis’? Factors such as personality, upbringing etc can’t be ignored.