Upgrade to remove ads
Social AS Psychology Edexcel.
Terms in this set (69)
What is the agency theory?
The autonomous state - people direct their own actions, and they take responsibility for the results of those actions.
The agentic state - people allow others to direct their actions and then pass off the responsibility for the consequences to the person giving the orders. In other words, they act as agents for another person's will.
What is social impact theory?
We are greatly influenced by the power and pressure of others, especially in group situations.
What impacts obedience (SIT) ?
Conformity will increase with strength, immediacy and number of influences
Social impact theory strengths
Proof in Milgram's variations
Social impact theory weaknesses
Each individual is different
Static not dynamic
Some people are more resistant to social pressure
What is psychosocial law?
This states that social influences increase with number of people at a decreasing rate
Milgram : Aim
To find out if participants would obey orders from an authority that went against their values
Milgram : Research method
Controlled lab experiment with pps who volunteered through an ad
Milgram : Sample
All men aged 20-50.
They were recruited through volunteer sampling
Milgram posted newspaper ads and they were paid $4 for turning up to a "study of memory".
Milgram : Procedure
1. Biology teacher as experimenter
2. Told pps that people learn more effectively through punishment
3. Rigged lots so pp was always the teacher
4. PP shown and tested equipment
5. Increasing volts labelled slight shock to danger
6. A shock was to be administered if a q was answered wrong
7. The Learner's answers were pre-set and his cries of pain tape-recorded.
8. At 300V the Learner banged on the wall and stopped answering.
9. The Experimenter ordered the Learner to treat 'no answer' as a wrong answer
10. The Experimenter had a set of pre-scripted "prods" that were to be said if the T
teacher questioned any of the orders. If all four prods had to be used, the observation would stop.
Milgram : Results
100% went to 350V
65% went to 450V
Subjects showed tension and one had a fit
Milgram : Conclusion
Obedience with an authority figure is very strong
Milgram : Experiment 7
The Experimenter gives the pps their instructions at the start, then leaves the Teacher alone in the room with the shock generator and a telephone. If the Teachers have questions or doubts, they must phone the Experimenter. The "prods" are delivered over the telephone.
Milgram : Experiment 7 Results
There was a significant drop in obedience, down to 22.5%, and some participants gave lower shocks than they were told to do (because they thought they were unobserved).
Milgram : Experiment 10
Milgram moves the study to a run-down office in the busy town of Bridgeport. There is nothing to make the participants link things to the University.
Milgram : Experiment 10 Results
There was a drop in obedience to 45.5% Participants showed more doubts and asked more questions. One of them made notes as if they intended to make a complaint later and another one objected that the study was "heartless".
Milgram : Experiment 13
The experimenter is dressed as an ordinary man and is a confederate.
Milgram : Experiment 13 Results
Only 20 participants did this Variation and only 4 (20%) obeyed by going to 450V.
Milgram : Experiment (2 confederates)
Two people administering the shocks- one condition the confederate protested and in the other the confederate continued
Milgram : Experiment (2 confederates) Results
When protested- 50% to 150V
When continued- 72.5% to 450V
Milgram : Experiment (Females)
Only female pps
Milgram : Experiment (Females) Results
65% went to 450V
Milgram : G
Volunteers- likely to be particularly obedient
Large sample size
All male, all american, time locked
Milgram : R
Milgram : A
My lai massacre
Milgram : V
Lack of ecological validity
Critics claim some pps were acting
Milgram : E
No informed consent
Factors affecting obedience
Locus of control
Gender and obedience
Although women show more anxiety there was little difference in terms of obedience
Sheridon and king 100% women shocked puppy
Culture and obedience
Big difference in culture
Milgram SA-87.5% Aus-28%
Collective (China and Israel) v Individualistic (UK)
Locus of control and obedience
Internal locus responsible for own actions
External locus determinism
Authoritarian personality and obedience
Typically submissive to authority
Those higher on f-scale obedient in Milgram
Burger : Aim
To find out if the same results as Milgram's 1963 study re-occur when the study is replicated with modern participants in 2009
Burger : Variables
IV is the base condition compared with the "model refusal" condition.
DV is measured by how many volts the last shock to be delivered was.
This is an Independent Groups design.
Burger : Sample
70 participants (a mixture of men and women) did the experiment, being randomly put into the two conditions. They were a volunteer sample, recruited through newspaper and online ads and fliers left in libraries. They were paid $50 before the study started. They were aged 20-81.
Burger : Method
The script resembles Milgram's
Test shock only 15V rather than Milgram's painful 45V.
The participant/teacher watches the learner being strapped into the electric chair and then sits at the shock generator in an adjacent room.
If the answer is wrong, the experimenter directs the teacher to deliver a shock, starting at 15V and going up in 15V intervals.
The learner indicates he has a "slight heart condition" but the experimenter replies that the shocks are not harmful. At 75V the learner starts making sounds of pain. At 150V the learner cries that he wants to stop and complains about chest pains
Burger : Results
Burger found that 70% of participants in the baseline condition were prepared to go past 150V, compared to 82.5% in Milgram's Variation
Burger : G
Men and women
Larger age range
Excluded people through screening
Burger : R
Filming (inter-rater reliability)
Burger : A
Same as milgram
Burger : V
Lack of ecological validity
Paid in advance increases validity
Burger : E
Approved by university ethics panel
What is prejudice?
Prejudice is an extremely unfavourable attitude associated with three negative components: cognitive (stereotypes), affective (hostility), behavioural (how we react)
What is RCT?
States that prejudice occurs as a result of competition for the same scarce resource, leading to conflict.
Example of RCT in real life
Crisis in Syria over scarce water, food and land
Sherif : Aim
To find out what factors make two groups develop hostile relationships and then to see how this hostility can be reduced.
Sherif : Procedure
Driven to robbers cave state park
1. Bonding stage
2. Competition stage
3. Cooling off stage
4. Superordinate goals
Sherif : Sample
22, 11 year old boys
White, middle class, protestant
Sherif : Bonding stage
Lasted a week. Each group had tasks to accomplish (eg a treasure hunt with a $10 prize). During this time the boys gave their groups names and discovered the existence of the other group; they immediately requested a baseball game against the other group.
Sherif : Competition stage
Involved a tournament between the two groups. This involved sports like baseball, tug-of-war and scavenger hunt but also experimental tests, like a bean-counting competition. A trophy was promised for the winners along with prizes like knives and medals.
Sherif : Cooling off stage
A day to cool off and list features of the other group
Sherif : Superordinate goals
Blocking the water pipe to the camp which forced the boys to work together to find the broken portion of pipe. Other tasks involved choosing films to watch together, cooperating to pull a (supposedly) broken-down truck and pitching tents with missing parts.
Sherif : Results
As soon as they found out about another group in the park, they resorted to "us-and-them" language and wanted a baseball match - so the boys themselves initiated the start of the friction phase.
Fighting and retaliation occurred
Sherif : Conclusion
The groups formed quickly, with hierarchies ("pecking orders) and leaders, without any encouragement from the adults.
When the groups meet in competitive situations, ingroup solidarity increases as does outgroup hostility.
"Mere presence" by itself doesn't reduce outgroup hostility.
Friction is reduced when the two groups are forced to cooperate, negotiate and share.
Sherif : G
Sherif : R
Inter rater reliability
Number scoring system
Sherif : A
The study shows how competition and frustration creates hostility towards outgroups. In society, this suggests that discrimination and violence could be reduced if jobs, housing, education and other opportunities were shared more fairly between different groups, such as ethnic groups or social classes.
Sherif : V
Lacked a control group
Observers had influence
Sherif : E
No valid consent
What is social identity theory?
Proposes that the mere presence or perception of another group can lead to prejudice
What are the three main stages of social identity theory?
Social categorisation, identification and comparison
What is social categorisation?
We categorise people in order to understand our social environment and define appropriate behaviours by social norms
What is social identification?
We adopt the identity of the group we categorise ourselves to be in, group membership will also increase self esteem
What is social comparison?
We tend to compare our group with others and to keep self esteem in tact we compare favourably forming in-group favouritism and out-group bias
Klee and Kandinsky
When giving points out they tended to reward their own group despite whether it would maximise their score, but just so they could do it at the expense of the other group
Jane Elliot : Aim
Wanted to explain racism and discrimination to her class
Jane Elliot : Procedure
Introduction about how people should be treated the way they want to be treated.
Then she divided her class into two groups (brown v blue)
She told her students that blue-eyed people are better and smarter than brown-eyed people, she gave privileges to blue-eyed students as they got to have extra minutes of recess.
Brown-eyed students had to wear collars so that their eye color could be identified form distance and they weren't allowed to play with blue-eyed students.
The next day the roles were reversed and Brown-eyed students were told that they were better than brown-eyed students.
Jane Elliot : Results
When blue-eyed students were told that they were better than brown-eyed students, they became arrogant and discriminated towards brown-eyed students (calling them labels)
However they performed better academically
Brown-eyed students became timid and complaint and they performed less academically
When the roles were reversed and brown-eyed students were told that they are better than blue-eyed people, the same thing happened
Factors effecting prejudice
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
Cognitive AS Psychology Edexcel.
Learning AS Psychology Edexcel.
Biological AS Psychology Edexcel
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY EDEXCEL AS LEVEL
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
IB Psychology HL S.C.L.O.A. Studies
Quiz 3 Social Psy
Psychology Socio- Cultural Perspective
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
SPAN CHAPTER 5
writing span 201