key studies Flashcards
Jenness 1932
-ps privately estimated the number of jellybeans in a jar, then discussed their estimates in a large group. then estimates were taken again privately
-found that the second guess was closer to the group average
evaluate Jenness 1932
-no intentional deception, so is a more ethical study
-lab based using an artificial situation, so lacks mundane realism
-tells us little about non-ambiguous situations where people conform to answers that are obviously wrong
-may involve both NSI and ISI - NSI = acceptance so changes guess, ISI = didn’t know the answer so changes guess
Asch 1955
-123 american males, told they were taking part in a study on ‘visual perception’, placed in groups of 7-9, sat in a line (all others were confederates)
-told to say the letter of the line that matched the length of an original line, the confederates got the answer wrong, the p was the last to answer (control group of normal ps and answers also)
-control group had an error rate of only 0.04%
-32% conformity, 75% of ps conformed to a wrong answer at least once, 5% conformed to all wrong answers
-post study interview found 3 reasons for conformity (distortion of action {avoid ridicule}, distortion of perception {actually thought something was wrong} and distortion of judgement {had doubts on their accuracy})
evaluate Asch
-method became a paradigm
-one one p tested at a time, so the study was uneconomical and time-consuming (crutchfield 1954 altered the study studying multiple ps at a time)
-unrealistic situation, lacked mundane realism
-unethical (deceit and psychological harm (stress))
-overall conformity was only 32%
zimbardo 1971
-75 male uni students responded to newspaper ad, volunteering for $15 a day
-21 students rated the most physically and mentally stable, mature and free from anti-social/criminal tendencies used (10 guards, 11 prisoners) random allocation to what side
-basement of stanford turned into a mock prison, prisoners arrested by real police and fingerprinted, stripped and deloused
-dehumanisation increased by making prisoners wear numbered smocks, nylon caps (shaved head) and a chain on one ankle
-guards wore reflective sunglasses, uniforms and were given handcuffs, keys and batons (tho physical punishment wasn’t allowed)
-9 prisoners in 3 cells, regular routines, plus visiting times, a parole and disciplinary board
-planned to run for 2 weeks
zimbardo findings
-after an initial prisoner ‘rebellion’ was crushed, dehumanisation increased as guards became more sadistic, taunting prisoners and giving them meaningless tasks
-prisoners became submissive and unquestioning, some sided with guards against protesters
-de-individuation noticeable by prisoners referring to each other by numbers instead of names
-after 36 hours one prisoner was released because of crying and rage, more released in following days for similar reasons
-stopped after 6 days when zimbardo realised the extent of harm occurring, and increasingly aggressive behaviour of guards (prisoners happy, guards upset)
-in following interviews both sides said they were shocked by behaviours shown
zimbardo conclusions and evaluation
-situational hypothesis favoured over dispositional
-people conformed readily to the roles given to them, even if they override their moral beliefs
-both sides displayed behaviours learnt from media sources (films etc) and learned models of social power
-individual differences were important, not all guards were brutal
-zimbardo hoped his work would lead to reforms in the prison system, initially beneficial reforms did occur, but zimbardo regarded the study as a failure because prison systems in the USA are worse now than when the study took place
milgram 1961
-40 american males aged 20-50
-responded to a newspaper ad
-met by a conf researcher in a lab coat, introduced to Mr wallace (conf learner)
-told the experiment concerned the effects of punishment on learning, and would be randomly allocated to teacher or learner (rigged, always gonna be teacher)
-increasing shocks to 450V
-all 3 went into a room, ps read out a list of paired-associate word tasks, then got a pre-recorded series of answers from learner, ps told to give a shock that increased every time learner got the answer wrong
-at 150V the learner began to protest, became more insistent at 300V, said he had heart problems that were starting to bother him, heard no more from 330V
-anytime p seemed reluctant to continue, they were met with verbal prompts to continue, told there would be no lasting damage
findings and conclusions of milgram
-quantitative = obedience rate was 62.5% that got to 450V (an earlier remote victim version with no pre-recorded responses, but instead pounding on the walls had 65%. 100% continued to at least 300V
-qualitative = may ps showed distress eg twitching, sweating, digging nails into flesh. 3 had uncontrollable seizures, some showed little discomfort
-‘germans are different’ hypothesis is false, these were americans that obeyed
evaluate milgram
-milgram paradigm for studying obedience
-intended as a pilot study, milgram did 19 variations to try and identify why people were so obedient
-practical application - was hoped findings would help form strategies to reduce destructive blind obedience, but not much has changed
-really more of a controlled observation than an experiment as there is no IV, however considering the variations can make it an experiment, as the IV is the thing changed each time
hofling et al 1966
-conf ‘dr smith’ instructed 22 nurses by the phone to give his patient ‘mr jones’ 20mg of an unfamiliar drug called astrofen (sugar pill), said he would sign the authorisation form later
-label on the box said daily dose was 10mg, and hospital rules require a signed authorisation form before administration, as well as being certain it was a real doctor
-21/22 nurses obeyed without hesitation
-a control group of 22 were asked what they hypothetically would do in the situation, 21 said they wouldn’t obey
-concluded power of authority was superior to hospital rules, and that what people say they do and what they actually do are different
evaluate hofling et al 1966
-suggests nurses and institutional staff should have special training in following rules rather than orders
-seems relevant to real-life settings
-rank + jacobsen 1977 - the drug was unfamiliar to nurses and they weren’t able to consult each other. when a familiar drug (valium) was used and they were allowed to speak with peers, only 2/18 obeyed, suggesting the study may not have external validity
moscovici et al 1969
-32 groups of 6, each had 4 ps and 2 confs
-told it was an investigation on perception
-shown 36 blue slides with filters varying the intensity of the colour
-in consistent condition, confs argued wrong that the slides were green
-in inconsistent condition, confs said 24 were green, 12 were blue
-8.2% agreement in consistent condition, 32% agreeing at least once
-1.25% agreement in inconsistent condition
-altho 8.2 is small, it’s a lot higher than 1.25, showing how consistency is important
evaluate moscovici et al 1969
-consistent minorities have greater influence on private attitudes (in a separate experiment where ps gave their answers privately, there was more agreement)
-moscovici only used female ps bcs he felt they were more interested in colours , meaning results don’t generalise to men
-unethical, involved deceit, so informed consent couldn’t be given
-doesn’t study important factors like group size, status or degree of organisation
-research generally supports, eg meyers et al found minority groups were successful in affecting majorities if consistent
