Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social Area (Milgram (Aim: See if American men follow orders to hurt…
Social Area
Milgram
Aim:
See if American men follow orders to hurt another man when told to by authority figure. Testing 'Germans are different' hypothesis.
Sample:
Self-selected sample (Newspaper adverts), 40 males aged 20-50 from New Haven USA, had wide range of jobs, paid $4.50 for taking part.
Method:
Lab experiment (no IV) and controlled observation
Procedure:
Experimenter and learner were confederates. Teacher (always participant) told to give a shock from '15v-450v' if a learner got a memory test question wrong. Standardised prods given if participant wanted to stop.
Results:
100% went up to 300v and 65% went up to 450v. 65% were obedient and 35% were disobedient. (Qualitative- pp's sweating, nervous laugh, sighs of relief).
Conclusions:
People obey authority figures without question even if it goes against their morals. Disproves the 'Germans are different' hypothesis.
Bocchiaro
Aim:
The study investigates processes of disobedience between individuals and unjust authority.
Sample:
149 participants, self-selected by flyers. 96 women and 53 men. They had a mean age of 20.8 yrs. Paid €7, or course credit. VU Amsterdam university. (138 comparison study)
Method:
Lab experiment (no clear IV)
Procedure:
8 pilot studies to test credibility & morality. Experimenter asked participants to write a statement recommending an unethical study to fellow student options of disobeying or 'blowing the whistle'. An independent sample (n138) predict their behaviour said only 4% believed they would obey authority.
Results:
Comparison: 3.63% thought they'd obey. 76.5% obeyed. 14.1% disobeyed, 9.4% blew the whistle (6% anonymous, 3.4%) No significant differences found in personality or religion between obedient, disobedient and whistle blowing participant. People with 'faith' more likely to whistleblow.
Conclusions:
People do obey unjust authority without question. There are no differences in personality between who obey/disobey/blow the whistle.
Piliavin
Aim:
Investigate whether variables (drunk/cane/race/no. of people on a train/model intervention) have an impact on helping behaviour
Sample:
4450 males & females who used the New York Subway. 45% black, 55% white.
Method:
Field experiment (with participant observation)
Procedure:
1 model, 1 victim, (males) and 2 observers (female) joined subway in critical/adjacent carriage. 70 secs victim collapsed (drunk/cane). Model conditions were: early/late/adjacent/critical. 2 females observed results. 103 trials took place on same train journey.
Results:
95% spontaneous help for cane, 50% for drunk. 90% helpers male, more same race help for black drunk condition. No diffusion of responsibility.
Conclusions:
Helping behaviour affected by situation a person is in and characteristics of a victim. Arousal: cost reward can explain bystander apathy.
Levine
Aim:
Look at helping in large cities around the world. 3 explanations for community characteristics in helping behaviour were tested (wealth, pace of life, culture - individualistic/collectivist simpatia).
Sample:
People in 23 large cities around the world including Brazil, India, Madrid, Spain, China, Hungary, Italy, USA, Malaysia.
Method:
Field experiment
Procedure:
Experiment had 3 IV's: 1. Whether the victim dropped a pen. 2. Whether the victim had an injured leg and was trying to pick up books. 3. whether the victim was blind and trying to cross the street.
Results:
3 most helpful countries were Rio de Janeiro - Brazil (93%), San Jose- Costa Rica 91% and Lilongwe- Malawi 86%. 3 least helpful Kuala Lumpa- Malaysia (40%). NY- USA (45%), Singapore (48%). Wealthy countries were less helpful. Individualistic countries showed less helping behaviours than Collectivist countries. Simpatia countries were more helpful.
Conclusions:
Helping behaviour is influenced by culture.
Strengths of social area
Useful (practical applications)
Controlled/reliable/causality
Weaknesses of social area
Unethical
Ethnocentric
Defining principles/outline of social psychology
Social area assumes individuals behaviour, thoughts processes and emotions influenced by their surrounding environment and people around them.
Key Studies
Milgram, Bocchiaro, Piliavin and Levine
Debates
Reductionism, determinism, unethical, situational, nurture and socially sensitive.