Key studies Flashcards by alice carson

SOCIAL INFLUENCE STUDIES

Kinda got this

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Lucas
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

:2006
:ppts were asked to solve easy and hard maths problem and the answers of three other ppts
:ppts would conform more on harder questions
:task difficulty is one variable

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Lucas ()

Research support for

Informational Social influence

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Asch
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

: 1951
: 123 American men had to say which of line A B or C matched line X on another card
: ppts conformed 36.8% of the time, 25% never conformed

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Asch

Research support for
Normative social influence

And the extent of social influence

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Asch's Variations 
Date:
Variation 1:
Variation 2:
Variation 3:

1955
Group size: varied no. of confederates between 1 and 15, conformity increased with group size but only to a point, one or two confederates isn’t enough to sway

Unanimity: having a non-conforming confederate, reduces conformity, whether or not they said the correct answer

Task Difficulty: lines more similar in length, conformity increased as pppts were less confident

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Asch Variations

Shows the variables that affect conformity

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Zimbardo
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

:1973
:21 volunteers, randomly assigned to role of guard or prisoners
:People conform to social roles, especially if there is lots of media portrayal about them

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Zimbardo

Shows conformity to social roles is a thing

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

1963
40 American Men volunteered, fixed draw to decide who was learner and who was teacher, Teacher sat in room with “experiment” and “Learner” was other side of the wall answering questions, the ppt had to deliver increasingly large electric shocks (15v -450V) to the “learner”.

All ppts delivered shocks up to 300V
12.5% stopped at 300 (confederate was banging on wall then stopped)
65% continued to the highest level

People are willing to obey even if they may harm others

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Milgram

Research into obedience

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Perry 
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

2013
Listened to tapes of Milgram’s ppts
Reported that only half believed the shocks were real
ppts may have been responding to demand characteristics

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Perry

Evaluating milgram

Showing low Internal validity

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Sheridan and King 
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

1972
Got students to give real shocks to a puppy
54% men and 100% women delivered what they thought was a fatal shock
Suggests effects Milgrams study were genuine because people behaved similarly when shocks were real

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Sheridan and King

Saying Milgram doesn’t have low internal validity

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Milgram’s variations

Variation 1:
Variation 2:
Variation 3:

:Proximity - teacher and Learner in same room (to 40%), hand on plate (to 30%), Experimenter on phone (20.5%)
- less proximity = distance themselves from consequences.

:Location - run down office block rather than Yale (47.5%)
- Yale gave study legitimacy and authority

: Uniform - experimenter in everyday clothes “member of public” from street (20%)
- lab coat symbol of authority so obey

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Milgram’s variations

Shows variables that increase obedience

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Bickman
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

1974
3 confederates dress in a jacket and tie, a milkman’s outfit or security guards uniform
They each stood in the street and asked passers by to pick up litter
People were twice as likely to obey the security guard

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Bickman

Evaluation of Milgram’s variations

Research support

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Rank and Jacobsen
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

:1977
:asked to administer a nonlethal overdose of a drug they knew
:16 out of 18 nurses disobeyed doctors orders to administer excessive drug dose to a patient

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Rank and Jacobsen

Evidence against milgram and agentic state

Nurses remained autonomous even though doctor was obvious authority figure

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Hofling
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

:1966
: 22 nurses called by “Dr Smith” asking them to administer 20mg of Astroten, bottle says 10mg is max daily dose
: 21 nurses administeres he druf

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Elms
Date:
Procedure:
Findings:
Conclusion:

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Use of Elms

Supports the authoritarian and dispositional explanations for obedience

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

``` Adorno Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Adorno

Created f-Scale

``` Holland Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Holland

Support for Locus of control and resistance to social influence

``` Moscovici Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Moscovici

Explanation for minority influence | and social change

``` Nolan Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Nolan

Research support for conformity and social change

MEMORY STUDIES

too many

``` Baddeley Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Baddeley

Flipping everything Coding for STM and LTM Research support for MSM

``` Baddeley Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

``` Jacobs Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Jacobs

Capacity of STM

``` Linton Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

``` Peterson and Peterson Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Peterson and Peterson

Duration of STM

``` Bahrick Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Bahrick

Duration of long term memory

``` KF Researchers: Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

:Shallice and Warrington : :

Use of KF

Counterevidence for MSM | Supports WMM

``` HM Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of HM

Case study to support different types of long term memory

``` Clive Wearing Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Clive Wearing

Case study to support different types of LTM

``` Loftus and Palmer Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Loftus and Palmer

Show effect of Leading Questions

``` Gabbert Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Gabbert

Show the effect of Post-event discussion

``` Johnson and Scott Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Johnson and Scott

Show negative effect of Anxiety on recall

``` Yuille and Cutshall Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Yuille and Cutshall

Show that Anxiety can have a positive effect on recall

``` Yerkes and Dodson Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Yerkes and Dodson

Explain the contradictory findings regarding anxiety's effect on recall

``` Kohnken Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Kohnken

Increase the accuracy of EWT using cognitive interview

``` Fisher and Geiselman Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Fisher and Geiselman

Developed the cognitive interview

ATTACHMENT

tears

``` Schaffer and Emerson Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Schaffer and Emerson

The formation of attachments Contradicts learning theory

``` Meltzoff and Moore Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Meltzoff and Moore

Investigated interactional synchrony

``` Lorenz Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Lorenz

Different ways animals attach | and critical period

``` Harlow Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Harlow

Do animals prioritise comfort or food Contradicts Learning theory

``` Brazelton Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Brazelton

Supports Bowlby's monotropic theory of attachment

Ainsworth

``` Ainsworth Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Ainsworth

Types of attachment

Use of Ainsworth

Types of attachment

Use of Ainsworth

Types of attachment

Use of Ainsworth

Types of attachment

``` Van Ijendoorn Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Van Ijzendoorn

Look at cultural variations of type of attachment

``` Rutter Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Rutter

Effect of Institutionalisation

``` Hazan and Shaver Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Hazan and Shaver

Influence of early attachment on adult relationships

APPROACHES

``` Pavlov Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Pavlov

Supports classical conditioning and behaviourist approach

``` Skinner Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Skinner

Operant Conditioning and Behaviourist approach

``` Bandura Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Bandura

Social learning theory

PSYCHOPATHOLOGY

``` Watson and Raynor Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Watson and Raynor

Behavioural explanation of phobias

``` Gilroy Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Gilroy

Support for behavioural treatment for phobias

``` Grazoli and Terry Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Grazoli and Terry

Cognitive explanation of depression

``` March Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of March

Cognitive treatment for depression

``` Nestadt Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Nestadt

Biological explanations for OCD

``` Soomro Date: Procedure: Findings: Conclusion: ```

Use of Soomro

Biological treatment for OCD

Haslam