Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Bocchiaro 2012 (Results (76.5% obeyed, 14.1% disobeyed, 9.4% whistleblew…
Bocchiaro 2012
Results
-
-
9.4% whistleblew (6% anonymously, 3.4% openly)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Method
Deceived: asked to write a statement persuading other students to take part in an unethical study on sensory deprivation
Told to use 2/4 adjectives: Exciting, incredible, great, superb
Were left in a room containing a computer to write the statement and ethics committee forms/post box
Whistleblowing: filling out an ethics committee form and posting it. Anonymous whistle blowers also wrote the statement
-
-
Given dispositional measure after experiment (HEXACO-PI-R, social values/religion etc)
-
-
Evaluation
Ethical considerations: debriefed, no informed consent, deceived, confidential, right to withdraw, protection of participants
Situational explanation/determinism/nurture/holism: Amsterdam university, novel situation, paid, volunteered themselves
-
Sampling bias: All students, standard deviation of age was 2.65, both males and females, all from Amsterdam
-
Validity/reliability: novel setting (low ecological) males and females (high population) high control/standardised (high internal validity/internal reliability)
-
-
-
-
Aim: To investigate the rates of obedience, disobedience and whistleblowing in a situation where no physical violence was involved but it was clear the instructions were unethical