SCLOA Studies

Question 1

Asch 1951

Answer 1

AIM: to investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform.
METHOD: 50 male students from Swarthmore College in the USA participated in a ‘vision test’. Using a line judgment task, Asch put a naive participant in a room with seven confederates who had agreed in advance what their responses would be when presented with the line task. The real participant did not know this and was led to believe that the other seven participants were also real participants like themselves.
Each person in the room had to indicate aloud which comparison line (A, B or C) was equal to the standard line. The answer was always obvious. The real participant sat as the second to last in the row and so heard almost everyone’s answers before they gave theirs.
There were 18 trials in total and the confederates gave the wrong answer on 12 trails (called the critical trials). Asch was interested to see if the real participant would conform to the majority view.
RESULTS: 32%of the participants conformed with the clearly incorrect majority on the critical trials. Over the 12 critical trials, about 75% of participants conformed at least once.
CONCLUSION: Post experiment interviews, most said knew the answers they were giving were wrong but had gone along with it due to fear of be ridiculed. A few said they really did believe that the groups’ answers were correct.
USE: Supports idea that people conform for two reasons-want to fit with a group (normative influence). Because they believe group is better informed than they are (informational influence).
EVALUATION
Strengths:
• Experimental design-cause an effect established.
• Unambiguous task.
• Replications-high reliability.
Limitations:
• Social climate: 1950s society very conformist due to McCarthyism-conformity to American values was expected. Later studies (eg Perrin and Spencer 1980) support this as they showed lower conformity rates.
• Participants: all males, likely x-army. Lack of population validity and generalizability.
• Nature of the task: artificial, low mundane realism. Therefore, low EV-can’t be generalised to real life situations of conformity.
• High level of deception.
• Not protected from psychological stress which might have occurred had they disagreed with majority.

Question 2

Jennes 1932

Answer 2

1932
Asked participants to estimate the number of beans in a bottle, individually first and then in a group.
When asked again individually again, the participants showed a shift in their own estimates to that of the group.
Strengths:
• First recorded study in conformity.
• Simple so easy to replicate and test reliability.
Limitations:
• Too simple: lots of variables that are hard to control.

Question 3

Sherif (1935)

Answer 3

1935
METHOD: Participants were led to believe the experiment was investigating visual perception. They were told the experimenter was going to move a spot of light and were asked to estimate how far a spot of light moved in a completely dark room, 100 times.
The spot of light was actually kept still, but because of the autokinetic effect illusion, it appears as though it is moving. They were then put in a group, and asked to do the same thing.
RESULTS: individually their estimates fluctuated at first and then their estimates became more consistent and a personal norm was established.
In a group, their estimates converged towards a central mean and their estimates soon reflected those of others in the group, a social norm was established.
Strengths:
• More experimental: more control ect to make it more reliable.
• Also more reliable due to repeats.
Limitations:
• Fatigue effects.
• Task is ambiguous.

Question 4

Asch (1955)

Answer 4

Same method

• found that conformity increases to about 7 people and then levels out
• Presence of a ‘true partner’ when the participants had another person giving correct answers conformity rates decreased: in studies that had one confederate that gave the correct response only 5% of participants continued to answer with the majority

Question 5

Bond and Smith (1996)

Answer 5

1996
METHOD: Bond and Smith carried out a meta-analysis of 133 conformity studies all using the Asch paradigm. The studies were carried out in the following 17 countries.
FINDINGS: The meta-analysis showed that more conformity was obtained in collectivistic countries like the Fiji Islands, Hong Kong and Brazil than in individualistic countries like the USA, the UK or France.

Question 6

Caldini et al (1975)

Answer 6

1975
METHOD: Conducted an experiment with three groups. In control group 1, people were approached and asked to escort a group of juvenile delinquents to the zoo, most refused. In control group 2, people were asked to spend 2 hours per week as a peer counsellor to juvenile delinquents for around 2 years, again most said no. In the experimental group, they were asked to be peer counsellors and then the request was downgraded and they were asked to escort the children to the zoo, the actual target request.
RESULTS: Showed 50% of the experimental group agreed to the second request. It was also found that the door-in-the-face technique produces high levels of compliance only when the same person asks the request, and the requests are similar in nature.
USE: The techniques works because of the norm of reciprocity, help those who help you. Saying no to a large request may make a person feel as though the owe the other person who made the request smaller.
MORE: This can be seen in Regan (1971) found that more people bought raffle tickets from a person who had previously bought them a soft drink than from someone who had not bought them a soft drink. Another explanation is the worthy person hypothesis (Foehl and Goldman 1983), guilt is induced by refusing a worthy cause, a charity for example.

Question 7

Caldini et al (1978)

Answer 7

METHOD: Asked students whether they would participate in a psychology experiment that started at 7 am and most people refused, this was the control group. In the experimental group, they were asked whether they would participant in a psychology experiment, most people agreed, later they were told that it started at 7 am and given the chance to drop out if they wanted.
RESULTS: On the day of the experiment, 95% turned up.
USE: The success of this technique is based on the principle of commitment, once a commitment has been made, you are likely to follow through even if the conditions change slightly.
MORE: Commitment to an individual appears to be more important than committing to the behaviour, of the ‘sales-manger’ takes over the negotiating, the customer is more likely to pull out than if the original sales person continues with the deal (Burger and Petty 1981).

Question 8

Ross (1977)

Answer 8

1977
AIM: To investigate whether knowledge of allocated social roles in a quiz show would affect participants’ judgements of people’s expertise.
METHOD: 18 students from Stanford university participated in a stimulated quiz game. Were randomly assigned to the roles of either questioner or contestant. 24 observers watched the quiz. The questioners were asked to compose 10 questions based on their own knowledge and the contestants were asked to answer these questions. The contestant had 30 seconds a question before the questioner gave the correct answer if the contestant hadn’t already. After the quiz all participants and observers were asked to rate the general knowledge of contestants and questioners.
RESULTS: Contestants and observers consistently rated the general knowledge of the questioners as superior.
LINK: Demonstrates FAE as the contestants & observers attributed the questioner’s ability to answer questions to dispositional factors, didn’t consider the situational factors that gave the questioners an advantage.
EVALUATION: The setup of the experiment was ingenious, it clearly gave the opportunity to demonstrate attributional biases as the questioners created their own questions, was known by all participants. However, sample not representative=findings difficult to generalise, especially as they were university students who often listen and receive answers from teachers, like the quiz questioner, and are seen as authority figures. Therefore, the idea that authority figures who ask questions are intelligent could be a learned response rather than an attributional error.

Question 9

Lau and Russel (1980)

Answer 9

1980
AIM: To compare the type and frequency of attributions made by sportswriters as opposed to coaches and players.
RESULTS: Showed that there was a clear tendency to attribute success internally 75% for winning team while only 55% of attributions for losing team were internal. Coaches and players were more likely to attribute success to dispositional factors such as talent or hard work, and attribute failure to situational factors such as injury or bad weather.
LINK: Supports idea of SSB as winning teams, therefore had experienced success, attributed this to dispositional factors. Whereas the losing team showed a much lower rate of internal attributions, most likely to uphold their self-esteem by blaming external factors they may consider out of their control such as the weather.

Question 10

Kashima and Triandis (1986)

Answer 10

1986
METHOD: Showed slides from unfamiliar countries to American and Japanese students and asked them to remember details.
RESULTS: When asked to explain their performance, American students explained their own success with internal factors and failures with external, whereas Japanese students tended to explain their failure with a lack of ability, which is known as modesty bias and is a cultural variation of the SSB.
LINK: Supports the idea of attributional variations between individualist and collectivist countries.

Question 11

Tajfel (1970)

Answer 11

1970
AIM: To investigate if boys placed in random groups based on an arbitrary task would display in-group favouritism and intergroup discrimination.
METHOD: 64 school boys state school in UK all knew each other well. Came to psychology lab in groups of 8. Boys shown clusters of varying numbers of dots, flashed onto a screen and had to estimate number of dots in each cluster. Experimenters assigned boys to groups at random categorised as ‘over-estimator’ ‘under estimator’ ect.
Subsequently, boys had to allocate small amounts of money to other boys in experiment. Only thing they knew was if they belonged to same or different category.
2nd experiment: boys were randomly allocated to groups based on supposed artistic preference for two painters. Then had to award money.
RESULTS: A large majority or boys gave more money to members of own category (ingroup) than members of other groups (outgroups). In 2nd experiment they tried to maximise difference between two groups.
USE: Results indicate they adopted a ingroup favouritism strategy. Supports predictions of SIT.
EVALUATION:
Strengths:
• Demonstrated “minimal group” all that is needed for individuals to exhibit discrimination against outgroups.
Limitations:
• Artificiality and demand characteristics: boy may have interpreted as competitive game and so reacted way they did.

Question 12

Sherif (1954)

Answer 12

1954
Aim: to understand dynamics of social identity, group conflict, prejudice and discrimination.
Method: 22 white 11yr old boys didnt know each other. Taken to remote summer camp and randomly put into two groups, neither knowing the existence of the other group. 1st week=team work activities, chose names-Eagles and Rattler-on shirts an flags.
Introduced through competitions, winner=prizes losers=nothing. Tension increased (prejudice and discrimination) sand derogatory songs, during each other flags, refusing to eat together. Face to face meeting didnt diffuse tension. Problem arose which threatened both groups (water blockage). They worked together to remove it, celebrated when succeed, Stopped negative images of each other. Members of one team brought drinks for all on the way home.
Conclusion:
competition over scarce resources needed in active dislike of another group.
need to combine together to defeat common threat creates bond of 2 competing groups, wipe out negative stereotypes.

Question 13

Cohen (1981)

Answer 13

1981
METHOD: Presented participants with a videotape showing a women having dinner with her husband. ½ told she was a waitress ½ told a librarian. They then sat a memory test about information seen in video.
RESULTS: Better recall for info inline with stereotype eg Waitress- drinking beer Librarian- wearing glasses, listening to classical music.
USE: shows we are likely to notice and subsequently remember information which is consistent with our stereotypes.

Question 14

Steele and Aronson (1995)

Answer 14

1995
AIM: To test effects of stereotype threat on behaviour.
METHOD: 30 min verbal test, very difficult multiple test questions. 1 group told genuine test of verbal abilities. Another group told lab test that was used to study how certain problems are generally solved.
RESULTS: 1st group African Americans scored much lower than European American participants. In 2nd group, AA scored higher than AA in first group and matched that of EA.
USE: the stereotype threat can affect the members of any social or cultural group, if the member believe in that stereotype.
* Aronson argues: could explain why some racial and cultural groups believe they’re more or less intelligent than others. Believing in such stereotypes can hard performance of these groups.

Question 15

Spencer et al (1977)

Answer 15

AIM: To test effect of stereotype threat on intellectual performance
METHOD: Gave maths tests to students who were strong at maths. Predicted women under stereotype threat would underperform compared to men taking test.
RESULTS: Women significantly underperformed compared to equally qualified men. However, when tested literature skills, two groups performed equally well, as women are not stereotype threatened in this area.
USE: Supports the idea of stereotype threat can have a detrimental effect of perforce.

Question 16

Zimbardo (1973)

Answer 16

1973
AIM: To demonstrate the situational rather than the dispositional causes of negative behaviour and thought patterns found in prison settings by conducting a prison stimulation with ‘normal’ subjects playing the roles of guard and prisoner.
PARTICIPANTS: Respondents to a newspaper advertisement, which asked for male volunteers to participate in a psychological study of ‘prison life’ in return for payment of $15 per day.They were given diagnostic interviews and personality tests to eliminate candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse. The study comprised 24 male college students (chosen from 75 volunteers).

METHOD: Zimbardo created a mock prison in the basement of Stanford university. Participants were randomly assigned to either the role of prisoner or guard in a simulated prison environment. Prisoners were treated like every other criminal, being arrested at their own homes, without warning, and taken to the local police station. When the prisoners arrived at the prison they were stripped naked, deloused, had all their personal possessions removed and locked away, and were given prison clothes and bedding. They were issued a uniform, and referred to by their number only. Guards worked only 8 hour shifts and were not given specific instructions, only to ‘maintain a reasonable degree of order within the prison necessary for its effective functioning’ and prohibition against use of physical violence. All guards were dressed in identical uniforms of khaki, and they carried a whistle around their neck and a billy club borrowed from the police. Guards also wore special sunglasses, to make eye contact with prisoners impossible.
Zimbardo observed the behaviour of the prisoners and guards as a researcher, and also acted as a prison warden.

RESULTS: The experiment was planned to take place over 14 days, however due to pathological reactions shown by both guards and prisoners, it was terminated early after 6 days.
The prisoners showed ‘Pathological Prisoner Syndrome’-disbelief was followed by rebellion, the failure of which led to negative emotions and behaviour. All showed passivity and dependence and half showed signs of depression, crying fits of rage, acute anxiety, and had to be released early. All but two said they would forfeit the money if they could be released early.
Experimenters suggested reactions were caused by:
• Loss of ID, emasculation, dependency and learned helplessness.
• Due to arbitrary and unpredictable control, and norms and structure of the prison system.
The guards showed ‘Pathology of Power’-huge enjoyment of the power they had led them to abuse it and dehumanise the prisoners. Prisoner’s rights were redefined and they were punished with little or no justification was applied with verbal insults. Not all guards initiated aggression but none contradicted its use.
Experimenters proposed reactions were because of:
• Sense of empowerment legitimised by role of ‘guard’ in the prison system.

EVALUATION
Strengths:
• Provided support for social psychological explanations of behaviour, has a wide range of implications for the usefulness and ethics of existing penal systems.
• Useful to facilitate understanding of psychological effects of imprisonment.
Limitations:
• Lack of EV: role play stimulations lacks mundane realism and could produce artificial results. Demand characteristics could explain findings-most guards said later they were just acting. Lack of physical violence and short sentence limit generalisability. However only 10% of prisoner conversations were about life outside and the guards also rarely exchanged personal information and mainly talked about prison topics.
• Ethical issues: had signed an informed consent form but didn’t know they would be arrested in public and exactly how real it would be.
• Terminated early and debriefing and assessment of subjects took place weeks, months and years after.
• Only male-generalizability to females, collectivist countries.

Question 17

Charlton et al (2000)

Answer 17

2000
AIM: To investigate the effect of the introduction of satellite TV on the aggressive behaviour of children.
METHOD: Conducted using 3-8 year olds on the island of St Helena who had not previously seen transmitted TV.
Aggressive behaviour was analysed in 1994 prior to the introduction of transmitted television in 1995. This was done through filming 256 minutes worth of free play in the school playground.
Behaviour was assessed again in 2000 after satellite TV became available, filming free play totalling 344 minutes.
A schedule of 26 playground behaviours was used, such as pushing, hitting and kicking, in addition to pro-social behaviours such as sharing and affection. The analysis of results was based on four anti-social and four pro-social behaviours in addition to gender and number of children involved.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the results. The levels of anti-social behaviour were very low on first observation and remained this way throughout various viewings. The children displayed almost twice as much pro-social than anti-social behaviour both before and after the introduction of television.

EVALUATION:
Generalizability-St Helena unique community with own culture, therefore difficult.
Reliability- recorded behaviours can be checked by independent observers. However hard to say whether changes in behaviour due to TV.
Applicable- Observed in natural setting where would normally engage in social behaviour and not constrained by rules.
Ecological validity- High because natural experiment.
Scientific- objective because inter-rater reliability eliminates subjective interpretation and avoids bias.

Question 18

Bandura et al (1961)

Answer 18

1961
Aim: To show that learning can occur by observing a model and that imitation can happen in the absence of that model.
Method: 72 children, 36 girls and 36 boys aged between 37 and 69 months were split into 3 groups based on their pre-existing level of aggression. One group saw the adult model behave aggressively towards a bobo doll, the second group saw a non-aggressive model, and third group, the control group, saw no model. Half of the subjects of each group observed a same sex model, while the other half observed opposite sex models.
In the experimental conditions, children were shown into a room containing toys and the bobo doll for 10 minutes while the model either played with the toys or behaved aggressively towards the bobo doll.
They were then taken to another experimental location and subject to mild aggression arousal through preventing them from playing with some toys.
They were taken into a room with toys and a bobo doll where they were observed for 20 minutes through a one-way mirror.
Results: Children in the aggressive condition were significantly more aggressive (physically and verbally) towards the bobo doll. They imitated the aggressive behavior of the model but also created other forms of aggression. Children were also more likely to imitate same-sex models and boys were more aggressive overall than girls.
Use: The findings support Bandura’s social learning theory, that children learn social behavior such as aggression through the process of observation.

Strengths
• Experiment so cause-effect relationship can be established. It could be demonstrated that the model did have an effect on the child’s subsequent behaviour.
• Control of variables eg gender of the model, behaviour of model, observation length ect, which could otherwise effect the result.
• Experiments can be replicated due to standardised procedure and instructions which allow for replicability. To test reliability of results.
• Quantitative data which can be analysed using inferential statistics.
Limitations
• Acts of aggression were shown and imitated against a bobo doll, not a real person.
• Lack of ecological validity, not a very realistic social situation, no interaction between the mode and children, and the fact that the model is a stranger.
• Children may have shown demand characteristics and acted aggressively to please.
• Doesn’t show long term effects.
• Unethical: Aggression was induced and taught to children. Exposure may have scared the children.

Question 19

Mead (1935)

Answer 19

1935-Study of gender development in three different tribes in New Guinea
Mead found a different pattern of male and female behavior in each of the cultures she studied, all different from gender role expectations in the United States at that time. She found among the Arapesh a temperament for both males and females that was gentle, responsive, and cooperative. Among the Mundugumor (now Biwat), both males and females were violent and aggressive, seeking power and position. For the Tchambuli (now Chambri), male and female temperaments were distinct from each other, the woman being dominant, impersonal, and managerial and the male less responsible and more emotionally dependent.
Mean argued that gender roles are culturally determined rather than biologically determined by innate sex differences.
Imposed etic view in that she used Western notions of masculinity/femininity to document gender roles in non-western countries. Mead has idea of masculinity/femininity embedded in her and used these ideas to characterise gender roles. An emic approach would have emphasised why the gender roles differed according to the natives perspectives.