Social studies Flashcards
name the 2 social studies and state the date they were published
Milgram (1963)
Bocchiaro (2012)
what was the key theme in the Milgram study
Obedience
why was the Milgram study done
were the Nazi soldiers ‘just obeying orders’?
Would everyone do the same in that situation?
Was the ‘Germans are different hypothesis’ correct?
what is the definition of obedience
responding to a direct order given by a perceived authority figure. There has to be an assumption that the behaviour wouldn’t have taken place without the order
what was the aim of the Milgram study
to investigate whether people (outside the German population) would obey a perceived authority figure even to the point of harming someone
what was Milgram’s hypothesis
(although not specific enough to be a proper research hypothesis) anyone will be capable of murder (he thought that anyone would obey his orders to kill someone)
which of these was Milgram's study: overt/covert uncontrolled/controlled unstructured/structured observation/interview qualitative/quantitative primary/secondary
overt/covert —> overt
uncontrolled/controlled —> controlled
unstructured/structured —> structured
observation/interview —> observation
qualitative/quantitative —> both
primary/secondary —> primary
why was the Milgram study not an experiment
There was no IV (independent variable) or DV (dependent variable)
Describe the sample in the Milgram study:
how many participants (gender)
how old were they
where were they from
40 males
between 20-50 years
from New Haven area
range of occupations and backgrounds
what was the target population in the Milgram study
All men, only really from the New Haven area
in the Milgram study what sampling method did they use to gather the sample
self-selected sampling (volunteer sampling) (advert asking for volunteers)
Briefly describe the Milgram study procedure
A man was recruited to play the role of Mr Wallace (the learner) and the participant played the role of the teacher.
The naïve participant received a 45V shock and saw the room the learner would be in.
participant went into next room (cant see Mr Wallace) and saw electric shock machine.
participant read word pairs to learner (learner should have memorised them)
participant was told by investigator (man in white coat) to give the next shock up when the learner got it wrong. (2/3 of the times)
While shocks were given a tape recording of Mr Wallace was played complaining. 330V it went silent and stopped responding.
in the Milgram study what did the investigator say when the participant didn’t want to continue
verbal prods like:
“you must go on”
“the experiment requires that you continue”
in the Milgram experiment how were the shocks displayed on the shock machine
went up in 15V intervals from 15V to 450V
Labels on the machine ranged from ‘very mild shock’ to ‘danger - extreme shock’ to ‘XXX’
When did Mr Wallace stop responding in the Milgram study
the recording stopped responding at 330V
in a survey Milgram did, what percentage of people would go to 450V
1%-3%
in the Milgram study, what percentage of participants went to 300V
100% of participants went to 300V
in the Milgram study, how many people stopped at 300V
5 people stopped at 300V
in the Milgram study, how many people stopped between 315V - 375V
9 people stopped between 315V and 375V
in the Milgram study, how many and what percentage of people went all the way to 450V
65% (26/40) of people went all the way to 450V
what was the physical and emotional reaction of most of the participants in the Milgram study
most people showed very severe physical and emotional signs of stress: shaking, sweating, hysterically laughing - and one man had a seizure
What were Milgram’s conclusions
anyone will commit murder if they’re put in the right situation. ‘the German are different’ hypothesis is false.
Obedience is caused by ‘situational factors’
Milgram study - Internal validity
Studies that suggest internal validity
Orne and Holland - participants had guessed the shocks weren’t real and were obeying as a response to demand characteristics.
Sheridan and King (1974) - same study but with puppies. shows that people really are obedient even when they know they’re harming someone/something
Milgram study - External validity
population
ecological
population - androcentric = all men, however Sheridan and king found that obedience might have been even higher if women were included
ecological - (low mundane realism) this is not an everyday task but it did mimic the pressure the Nazi soldiers were under
Milgram study - Internal reliability
Recordings of Mr Wallace
test shock pad (45V)
participants were always the teacher (rigged)
same moment Mr Wallace went silent
Mr Wallace and the investigator were the same people
Milgram study - External reliability
it would be unethical to repeat the study now
similar research shows lower levels of obedience
how was the Milgram study replicated in a real life situation
Hofling - 21/22 nurses gave the wrong drug to a patient because of the doctors orders
How did Milgram deceive his participants
Milgram actively deceived his participants by telling them that they were actually giving real shocks to Mr Wallace
How did Milgram comply with the protection of participants guideline
He didn’t comply with this guideline as he put them under very stressful situations (one man had a seizure because he was so stressed) many others were trembling, sweating, stuttering and laughing nervously
How did Milgram comply with the right to withdraw guideline
Even though the participants didn’t know, they did actually have a choice to leave the study however the experimenter kept telling them that they “had to continue” and “the experiment requires that they continue” and “you have no choice but to continue”
what debates does the Milgram experiment relate to:
Nature/Nurture
Determinism/Free-will
Reductionism/Holism
nurture = Taught to obey authority figures (white lab coat) from an early age determinism = effected by the way the other person is acting (white lab coat was casual about the situation) Reductionism = slightly because if we assume obedience will occur based on only one factor (presence of authority figure0 then we assume all other factors influencing obedience are irrelevent
why was the Bocchiaro study done
individuals in authority (legitimate/illegitimate) have social power to influence those with a lower power and their behaviour
what are the key themes in the Bocchiaro study
obedience/disobedience/whistleblowing
define whistleblowing
A person who exposes/informs on a person or organisation they believe is engaging in unlawful or immoral activity
what were the aims of the Bocchiaro study
- to investigate how people deal with an unethical and unjust request. Participants have the option of obeying, disobeying or whistleblowing
- to investigate the difference between how people think they will behave and how they actually behave
- to investigate whether people who disobey/whistle blow show different personality characteristics from those who don’t.
which of these was Bocchiaro's study: overt/covert uncontrolled/controlled unstructured/structured observation/interview qualitative/quantitative primary/secondary
overt/covert —> overt
uncontrolled/controlled —> controlled
unstructured/structured —> structured
observation/interview —> observation
qualitative/quantitative —> quantitative (qualitative=personality tests)
primary/secondary —> primary
why was the Bocchiaro study not an experiment
The Bocchiaro study was not an experiment because there were no independent variables
In the Bocchiaro study what were the dependent variables
whether the participants obeyed, disobeyed, blew the whistle
The scores of the two personality tests
where was the Bocchiaro study conducted
VU university in Amsterdam
what was the sampling method used to recruit the participants in the Bocchiaro study
volunteer sampling (flyers around the university advertising the study)
In the Bocchiaro study the first sample (they were asked what they would do) how many participants were there and where were they from
138 undergraduate students participating in the first study and they were from VU university in Amsterdam
In the Bocchiaro study how many participants were there, where did they come from, and how much were they paid for taking part
males and females (age)
149 participants in the main study (96 women, 53 men) (mean age = 20.8)
7 euros or course credit
11 participants were removed from the 160 original main study due to their suspiciousness
give brief description of the Bocchiaro study procedure
- the first sample of 138 participants were given a detailed description of what the study entails and were asked “what would they do? and what would an average student at your university do?”
- The experimenter was a dutch male who was formally dressed with a stern demeanor
- the experimenter asked the participants to give a few names of fellow students forward and were told the cover story
- the participants were told to write a statement convincing the students they chose to take part in the study
- the experimenter left the room for 3 minutes
- they were told they could chose words from the list of “exiting”, “incredible” and “superb” (no negative effect of sensory deprivation)
- the participant wrote the statement in a 7 minute period
- If a participant believed the proposed research on sensory deprivation violated ethical norms he/she could anonymously challenge it by putting a form in the mailbox.
- the participants were then fully debreifed
in the Bocciaro study, how many pilot studies did they do and why did they do them
8 pilot studies and they did them to standardize the experimenters behavior and to make sure it was an ethically correct experminet
in the Bocchiaro study, how long did the session last
about 40 minutes
in the Bocchiaro study how can students be disobedient but not whislteblowers
they would use negative words or not use the positive words to describe the study to the other students but they wouldn’t mail the ethics form
In the Bocchiaro study how can students be whistleblowers but not disobedient
they would mail the ethics complaint form but they would use positive words and describe the study in a good way to the other students
In the Bocchiaro study, what did the first group of 138 participants respond to: How they would: obey disobey whistle-blow
How an average student at the university would:
obey
disobey
whistle-blow
How they would:
obey —> 3.6%
disobey —> 31.9%
whistle-blow —> 64.5%
How an average student at the university would:
obey —> 18.8%
disobey —> 43.9%
whistle-blow —> 37.3%
In the Bocchiaro study what did the 149 participant actually do:
obey
disobey
whistle-blow
obey —> 76.5% (n=114)
disobey —> 14.1% (n=21)
whistle-blow —> 9.4% (n=14)
among the whistle-blowers how many were open and how many were anonymous in the Bocchiaro study
open = 6.0% (n=9) anonymous = 3.4% (n=5)
In the Bocchiaro study, what did the personality test find
that there was no significant relation to personality traits
what were the conclusions in the Bocchiaro study
- people tend to obey to authority figures, even if the request is unethical
- people tend to act differently to how they say they will because we think that we’re special than we actually are
- we think that we are better than other people at resisting social pressure (poor at predicting our own actions)
- obedience depends on situational factors (personality did not effect the participants judgment
Bocchiaro - internal validity
- Highly controlled observation, well controlled extraneous variables (same amount of time to decide actions, same cover story)
- participants may have guessed the aim (11 participants were removed from the study because of suspiciousness) and may have responded tot demand characteristics
- volunteers means that they may have been more motivated and help the investigator and be more obedient
Why was Bocchiaro especially careful when it came to the ethical guidelines
Because Bocchiaros study was so similar to Milgrams study, that had many ethical issues
What debates does the Bocchiaro study relate to:
Free-will/determinism
Situational/individual
Nature/Nurture
Freewill = participants actually did have a chance to choose how to behave and Bocchiaro purposely left them to discuss for 3 minutes so they could decide (14 people actually did whistle blow) Determinism = the situation seemed to force most people to obey (and not whistle blow) even when they didn't expect/predict they would Situational = depends on that environment and how that causes people to act i certain ways (caused by other people) e.g. Put form in the box if you see other people doing it Nurture = people have been taught to whistle blow Individual = whether certain personality types would be less obedient
How did Bocchiaro comply with the right to withdraw
The participants were informed clearly at the start they had the right to withdraw at any moment
How did Bocchiaro comply with the deception guideline
Deception did occur but didn’t cause harm and only what was necessary
Bocchiaro - external reliability
We could test the external reliability
How did Bocchiaro comply with the debriefing guideline
All details of the study and why it was being carried out was given to the participants
Bocchiaro - external validity
Population
Ecological
Population - we can generalise because the study used both men and women
-limited age range (18 - 20’s, mean age =20.8)
Ecological - it is related to real life obedience and whistleblowing processes
-mundane realism is quite lw as it is not a normal everyday task
Bocchiaro - internal reliabilty
Highly Controlled observation, that was highly standardised as they all have the same cover story for all the participants so they all go through the same experiences
what are the similarities between the 2 core studies in the social area
- Both a test of obedience
- They were not experiments (controlled observations)
- (Venn diagram in folder)
how does the contemporary study change our understanding of the key theme from the classic study in the social area
people tend to obey, even a figure in less authority
how does the contemporary study change our understanding of individual, social and cultural diversity from the classic study in the social area
- From Bocchiaro’s study we found that women are equally or more obedient than men
- People were very bad at predicting behaviours (their own and others behaviours) Bocchiaro asked about their own behaviour as well as others
what are the main assumptions of the social area
- All behaviour occurs in social context, even when no one else is physically present
- Other people and the society they have created are a major influence on peoples behaviour, thought processes and emotions
- An individuals behaviour is affected by situational factors
what are the most common research methods used in the social area
observations
experiments
what are the most common issues in the social area
ethics
ethnocentrism (cultural bias)
androcentrism/estrocentrism (male/female dominant)
What are the strengths of the social area:
evidence from studies
analysis
**Can explain large scale historical and social events in a way no other area can e.g. the holocaust, civil rights movement, women’s suffrage, football hooligans. explains the immense power of social groups
evidence = Milgram - people will do almost anything to obey a figure in authority
analysis = Influenced by situational factors
**Can be applicable to everyone, so can bring psychology to wider audiences (whilst also helping us understand our own individual behaviours)
evidence = Milgram - further test to prove
analysis = further tests to prove hypothesis
What are the weaknesses of the social area:
evidence from studies
analysis
**Human social behaviour changes over time and across different cultures. This means research can have a ‘shelf life’ or be difficult to generalise to other cultures
evidence = Bocchiaro - Results are more convincing
analysis = more people obeyed, better ethics
**Very difficult to abide by all ethical guidelines-very hard to study natural social behaviour without deceiving or harming participants in some way
evidence = Milgram - had to deceive participants so they didn’t know what they were being tested on and respond to demand characteristics
analysis = didn’t abide by ethical guidelines, seizure = protection of participants
