s.i evaluations

Question 1

Sherif

Answer 1

As the light didn’t move and it was an ambiguous task, it was impossible to provide a ‘correct’ answer, so it was impossible to say for certain that the participants in the experiment had actually conformed as they were likely to change their minds any way
Ecological validity. The task used by Sherif is far from an everyday task that represents everyday life. It is hard to imagine that people would often discuss how far a point of light appears to be moving in a darkened room, and so the study lacks ecological validity and mundane realism

Question 2

Asch

Answer 2

Lacks mundane realism as it’s hard to generalize o a real life situation, it was done in 1950s America; a very conformist time, doesn’t reflect other times, androcentric and they’re young, There are also sampling issues regarding this study as the study was only carried out on men thus the sample was gender bias and therefore the results cannot be applied to females- androcentric, deception

Question 3

milgram weaknesses

Answer 3

he used a small sample and US population(enthnocentric)-population validity. Internal validity- orne and holland argued the participants didn’t believe they were giving electric shocks and went along with it- however participants said they did and were distressed. External validity- it was repeated in other countries with different results, orne and holland say it lacks mundane realism

Question 4

milgram ethics weaknesses

Answer 4

Diane Baimrid said it placed participants under far too much emotional stress and pressure, deception- participants were tricked into thinking it was a study on punishment, when it was actually on obedience, could have subjected participants to psychological damage, lack of respect to participants as it causes them harm

Question 5

milgram strengths

Answer 5

Carried out a sensitive debriefing to all participants, knowledge- asked participants, students and psychologists on outcome, the ethical guidelines were only drafted to protect participants during research. No harm- follow up questionnaires showed 84% were glad to have taken part and there’s no evidence of long term harm.