Social Pyschology Flashcards
define obedience
change in an individuals behaviour to comply with a direct order from an authority figure
Aim on Milgram
see what level of obedience would be shown when told by a legitimate authority figure to administer shocks to another person
Procedure of Milgram
- 40 males ages 20-50
- volunteer sampling (advertisement)
- $4.50
- Yale
Explain experiment
Results of Milgram
-100% to 300v , 65% to 450v
-nervous laughter, trembled , 3 had seizures
Conclusion of Milgram
Most important factor determining obedience is situation
“Obedience isn’t a feature of German culture but a universal feature of human behaviour “
Methodological
Reliability
Objectivity
Subjectivity
Internal validity
Ecological validity
Generalisability
Acronyms for each command
DESCRIBING a STUDY = APRC
EVALUATING a STUDY = ROSIEG
EVALUATING a THEORY = RUNSCAR
Agentic state
individual follows an order from a legitimate authority figure , they take no responsibility for consequences of actions , act as an agent
Moral strain
negative feeling caused by doing something we believe is morally wrong but feel compelled to do
Autonomous state
Individual acts out of free will , they take responsibility for the consequences of thier actions
Burger study ethics
- only went to 150v
- immediately debriefed
- clinical psych supervised all trials
- screened before trial
- 3 reminders that they can leave - still get $50
- approved by Santa Clara University review board
Aim of Burger
Replicate Milgrams experiment in an ethical way to compare findings
- if his findings were era-bound
- if obedience is affected by gender
- if theres less obedience if refusal is modelled by someone slse
Procedure of Burger
- volunteer sampling (advertisement)
- screened for …
- 29 men , 41 women ages 20-81
- $50
- stopped at 150v (point of no return)
- immediately debriefed
- condition 1 = same , heart condition mentioned at 150v
- condition 2 = modelled refusal , teacher swaps with participant at 90v
Results of Burger
condition 1 - 70% burger , 82.5% milgram
condition 2 - 63.3% burger , 82.5% milgram
Conclusion of Burger
Milgrams results are still valid , obedience still influenced by situational factors
- not era-bound
- dont differ by gender
define social impact
effect that real or imagined people can have on our behavior
mathematical equation for social impact
i=f(SIN)
define division of impact
social impact is reduced if there are more targets than sources
define diffusion of responsibility
feeling less responsible for behavior as number of people increases
run down office block (10)
- conducted in a 3 room office suite in a run down office building in Bridgeport
- no longer associated with Yale University and was carried out by the Research Association of Bridgeport
- 100% to 300v , 47.5% to 450v
telephonic instruction (7)
- 22.5% to 450v
- gave lower shocks as they felt they weren’t being watched
- shows physical presence of authority affects obedience
ordinary man gives orders (13)
- 13 - 20% to 450v
- 13a - protests and tried to stop him
- replaced with ordinary man
Define prejudice
Biased Attitude formed upon little or no prior information about a person or group
Define discrimination
Action that occurs due to prejudice whereby we treat a person or group differently based upon our beliefs about them
negative interdependence
where 2 groups are seeking to achieve a goal only one can achieve
define zero sum
only one person can win , one has to loose
what are superordinate goals
a shared goal that can only be achieved by intergroup cooperation
what is positive interdependence
neither group can reach their goal unless the other reaches theirs
RUNSCAR
Refuting evidence
Useful applications
Nature v nurture
Supporting evidence
Credibility
Alternative explanations
Reductionism
Sherif Aim
explore how competition of group goals can lead to prejudice attitudes towards an outgroup and increase ingroup solidarity
Sherif Sample
- 22 boys age 11
- middle class backgrounds
- protestant
- similar education
Sherif Procedure
- field experiment (robbers cave state park) , unaware of study
- parental consent
- divided into groups of equivalent ability
- separately transported to cabins
- observations , tape recordings , sociometric analyses
- 3 stages = ingroup formation , friction stage , integration phase
ingroup formation
- groups were unaware of each others existence
- formation of group norms and relationships
- bonding activities
- observed relations , status , roles
- strong group identity
- social norms formed
- clear leader present
friction phase
- groups made aware of each other
- became hostile
- experimenter designed competitive activities
- psychologists dressed up as camp workers
- discrimination
- aggressive behavior
- 6.4% rattlers friends with eagles
- 7.5% eagles friends with rattlers
integration phase
- increased contact
- after 7 failed attempts superordinate goals were introduced
- water shortage , broken food truck , movie ,money
- breakdown of original ingroups
- bonded , wanted to share a bus back
- outgroup friendships increased , 36.4% rattlers friends with eagles , 23.2% eagles friends with rattlerS
Sherif Conclusion
- groups develop status hierarchies and norms
- intergroup competition leads to outgroup hostility
- social contact isnt enough to reduce prejudice , superordinate goals are needed
according to tajfel what are the 3 processes for the development of prejudice
- social categorisation
- social identification
- social comparison
AO3 of social identity theory
- overlooks individual differences
- doesn’t take personality into account (Adornos)
- can be applied to explain radicalisation (psych in society)
- isolates group memberships as the main factor , not considering the interactions between groupings
AO3 + of questionnaires
- standardised
- cheap + quick
- quantitative if closed Qs
- internal validity
- can study opinions
AO3 - of questionaries
- may not be generalisable
- response bias
- subjectivity when analysing results (if opinions)
- demand characteristics
obedience individual + development
I - personality + gender
D - gender + culture
obedience individual
- locus of control (rotter 1966)
- authoritarian personality (adorno 1950)
obedience developmental
- social learning theory
- collectivistic/individualistic
- PDI
prejudice individual
- right wing authoritarianism
- five personality
what are the 3 types of interviews + data
structured - predetermined closed Qs , quantitative
semi structured - predetermined and probe Qs , quantitative and qualitative
unstructured - topic for discussion , qualitative
define social identity
self concept formed from how we view ourself in relation to membership of our social group
social categorisation
belonging to a specific group (in-group) and all others are out-groups, this process involves stereotyping
social identification
taking on norms and attitudes of our in-group, strong group identity forms due to shared norms
social comparison
occurs with out-groups when we see in-group as better forming in-group favouritism so make us the best, to do this unfair comments are made to boost self esteem causing prejudice/discrimination, doesn’t happen with people we don’t know or aren’t relevant in our lifes
