Social Flashcards
Social assumption
One assumption of the social approach is that behaviour is the result of the situation we are in at any one time, rather than our individual disposition. Therefore, behaviours do not remain constant across a variety of situations. For example in situations where an authoritative figure is present, we are more likely to behave obediently, according to Milgram.
What is the following an assumption of?
“Behaviour is the result of situations rather than disposition, thus behaviours do not remain constant across different situations”
Social approach
Give a similarity between two social studies.
Milgram and Piliavin are both very unethical
- M: Deception (pt.s believed they were partaking in a study on memory but actually on obedience) and protection (pt.s showed signs of distress i.e. seizures)
- P: Deception (pt.s believed the victim was really ill/drunk but actually acting confederate) and consent (pt.s didn’t consent bc. they didn’t know it was taking place)
Give a difference between two social studies.
Milgram and Piliavin used different samples
- M: group of white men from same area in USA (thus ethnocentric and gender-biased/androcentric sample)
- P: men and women of varying ages and ethnicities (thus more representative samople than M’s)
Give a similarity and a difference between two social studies.
Milgram and Piliavin are both very unethical
- M: Deception (pt.s believed they were partaking in a study on memory but actually on obedience) and protection (pt.s showed signs of distress i.e. seizures)
- P: Deception (pt.s believed the victim was really ill/drunk but actually acting confederate) and consent (pt.s didn’t consent bc. they didn’t know it was taking place)
Milgram and Piliavin used different samples
- M: group of white men from same area in USA (thus ethnocentric and gender-biased/androcentric sample)
- P: men and women of varying ages and ethnicities (thus more representative samople than M’s)
Give a similarity between Milgram’s study and Piliavin’s study in the social approach.
both very unethical
- M: Deception (pt.s believed they were partaking in a study on memory but actually on obedience) and protection (pt.s showed signs of distress i.e. seizures)
- P: Deception (pt.s believed the victim was really ill/drunk but actually acting confederate) and consent (pt.s didn’t consent bc. they didn’t know it was taking place)
Give a difference between Milgram’s study and Piliavin’s study in the social approach.
used different samples
- M: group of white men from same area in USA (thus ethnocentric and gender-biased/androcentric sample)
- P: men and women of varying ages and ethnicities (thus more representative samople than M’s)
Give 2 brief strengths of the social approach using an example from a social study.
- Useful applications to understand power of different situations (e.g. M showed influence of authority on obedience - could explain atrocities of WW2/Holocaust) thus can prevent future atrocities
- Low risk of demand characteristics due to deception (e.g. in P’s field experiment, unaware of observation) thus valid
Explain how useful applications are a strength of the social approach (using P.E.C).
One strength of the social approach is that it has provided many useful insights to help us understand the power of different situations. For example, Milgram’s research showed how obedience can be influenced by presence of authority figures, which could help to explain the atrocities that occurred during the second world war and the Holocaust. Such research is useful to allow us to prevent future atrocities by informing leaders of the effects their power can have and how to monitor this power.
Explain how less demand characteristics is a strength of the social approach (using P.E.C).
One strength of the social approach is that as participants tend to be deceived in much of the research, there is a low risk of demand characteristics. For example, in Piliavin’s field experiment it is unlikely that the helping behaviours recorded were a form of demand characteristics because the train passengers were unaware of the observation taking place,meaning whether they helped or not and their comments were a true reflection of their natural behaviour. This allows us to measure the effects of social variables on behaviour in a valid way.
Give two strengths of the social approach.
One strength of the social approach is that it has provided many useful insights to help us understand the power of different situations. For example, Milgram’s research showed how obedience can be influenced by presence of authority figures, which could help to explain the atrocities that occurred during the second world war and the Holocaust. Such research is useful to allow us to prevent future atrocities by informing leaders of the effects their power can have and how to monitor this power.
One strength of the social approach is that as participants tend to be deceived in much of the research, there is a low risk of demand characteristics. For example, in Piliavin’s field experiment it is unlikely that the helping behaviours recorded were a form of demand characteristics because the train passengers were unaware of the observation taking place,meaning whether they helped or not and their comments were a true reflection of their natural behaviour. This allows us to measure the effects of social variables on behaviour in a valid way.
Give 2 brief limitations of the social approach using an example from a social study.
- Reductionists as ignores possible influence of other factors like disposition or physiological (e.g. M - pt.s may have weak-minded disposition which allowed them to continue ‘shocking’) consider all reasons to prevent certain behaviours occurring
- Lab experiments lack ecological validity (e.g. R&H used a fake prison with no violence, right to withdraw and permeability of group boundaries which do not occur in reality) so it does not explain how situations affect behaviour in real life situations
Explain how reductionism is a limitation of the social approach (using P.E.C).
A weakness of the social approach is that it is reductionist in that it ignores the possible influence of other psychological concepts, such as physiological approach or dispositional attributes, and assumes behaviour can only be the result of situational changes. For example, in Milgram, researchers would argue that because of the presence of the authoritative figure, participants went up to 450 volts on the shock generator. However, not all participants did so, thus suggesting disposition could possibly influence the levels of obedience, as individuals with a weaker will could be more susceptible to following the prods of the authoritative figure. This is a weakness as it ignores how behaviour in real life can be affected by approaches other than social, thus perhaps we need to be more holistic in our approach to psychology, incorporating other approach’s ideas and theories to gain a more valid and well-rounded view.
Explain how lack of ecological validity is a limitation of the social approach (using P.E.C).
One weakness of the social approach is that as many social theories are tested under laboratory conditions, the approach lacks ecological validity. For example, in Reicher & Haslam’s study, the situation involved an artificial prison where violence was not allowed, prisoners could leave whenever they wanted and prisoners had the opportunity to be promoted to guard status, whereby in real life such features are not realistic of a legitimate prison. This is a weakness because such research is not testing how social theories and different situations affect behaviour in real life.
Give two limitations of the social approach.
A weakness of the social approach is that it is reductionist in that it ignores the possible influence of other psychological concepts, such as physiological approach or dispositional attributes, and assumes behaviour can only be the result of situational changes. For example, in Milgram, researchers would argue that because of the presence of the authoritative figure, participants went up to 450 volts on the shock generator. However, not all participants did so, thus suggesting disposition could possibly influence the levels of obedience, as individuals with a weaker will could be more susceptible to following the prods of the authoritative figure. This is a weakness as it ignores how behaviour in real life can be affected by approaches other than social, thus perhaps we need to be more holistic in our approach to psychology, incorporating other approach’s ideas and theories to gain a more valid and well-rounded view.
One weakness of the social approach is that as many social theories are tested under laboratory conditions, the approach lacks ecological validity. For example, in Reicher & Haslam’s study, the situation involved an artificial prison where violence was not allowed, prisoners could leave whenever they wanted and prisoners had the opportunity to be promoted to guard status, whereby in real life such features are not realistic of a legitimate prison. This is a weakness because such research is not testing how social theories and different situations affect behaviour in real life.
