Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Sociology Final Project, Results, Results, Results, Experiment Method and…
Sociology Final Project
Results
In 8.42% of all trials, the participants agreed with the minority.
32% of the majority agreed at least once with the minority
If answers by the minority were inconsistent, only 1% agreed with the minority
The minority influences the majority, but to a lesser degree than the majority influences the minority.
Students were much less sure of their accuracy when contradicted by two confederates versus one confederate.
Students believed that the confederates had little to no impact on their color perception
Results
All female subjects complied with instructions to shock the puppy all the way to the end of the scale.
Subjects were emotionally distressed, exhibiting signs such as coaxing the puppy to escape the shock, pacing from foot to foot, puffing, weeping.
Participants attempted to minimize discomfort to the puppy without confronting the experimenter by shortening the time shocking (which was impossible due to it being on a timer)
Subjects disobeyed by lying about shocking the puppy
Females were not more likely to stop or disobey authority.
Results
65% of the sample administered the final shock
100% administered a shock of at least 300 volts.
Individuals exhibited signs of nervousness and being uncomfortable, such as sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting their lips, groaning, digging their fingernails, nervous laughter or smiling.
Rise in questions about the research ethics of scientific experimentation due to the extreme emotional stress
Rise of the theory of conformism and agentic state theory: leaving decision to the group and its hierarchy/carrying out another's wishes and absolving themselves of responsibility
Experiment Method and Design
How
College students participated in an experiment by shocking the puppy for incorrect answers while under the supervision of the experimenter
Where
University of Missouri, Kansas City and University of California, Berkeley
When
1972
Variables
Independent
Breed of puppy
Number of participants
Number of authority figures
Gender
Age
Distance
Dependent
Obedience to Authority
Willingness to shock the puppy
Experiment Method and Design
How
Participants would be "randomly" selected to become the teacher, being told to shock the other "participant" should they fail to answer the question correctly.
Where
In the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University
When
July 1961, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi War Criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem
Variables
Independent
Time of day
Authority Figure
Number of authority figures
Number of participants
Number of learners
Difficulty of questions
Race of authority/learner
Type of learner
Dependent
Willingness to shock learner
Obedience to authority
Results
This study was terminated early and wasn't an accurate, replicable experiment. It didn't hold concrete independent and dependent variables, a control group, or anything that can be analyzed
The assigned prison guards were totalitarian and violent towards the prisoners, men who were very alike and who did not know each other.
Few prisoners left the experiment, with the majority forgetting that they have that ability. They forgot about the limited time of the experiment.
This is a terrible experiment, both morally and scientifically, showcasing the violence that humans are willing to perform, while failing to perform any real science.
Experiment Method and Design
How
Participants were randomly assigned to become prison guards or prisoners and would be forced to conform to that role.
Philip Zimbardo would act as the Prison Superintendent and an undergraduate research assistant, David Jaffe, took on the role of the Warden
Funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research
Where
Basement of Jordan Hall
When
August 15-21, 1971
Variables
Independent
Roles assigned to individuals
Application process
Type of dehumanizing uniforms/equipment
Length of study
Power afforded to prison guards
Dependent (ish)
Actions of the prisoners
Actions of the guards
Experiment Method and Design
How?
Lab experiment
Three different line lengths and one obvious answer. Last to answer
Where?
Swarthmore College (Liberal arts college in Swarthmore, Pennsylvania)
When?
1951
Variables
Independent
Individual character
Uniformity of the group
Presence of a true partner (critical subject)
Correct answers
Semicorrect answers
Late/Left
Size of majority
Difficulty of the experiment/small variations/errors
Dependent
Conformity to the majority
Experiment Method and Design
How
A minority would give an incorrect answer about a slightly ambiguous color perception task
Did not gain fully informed consent and deceived participants
Lab experiment
Volunteering
Where
College in America
When
December, 1969
Variables
Independent
Size of minority
Corroboration of the minority
Consistency of the minority
Time allocated for the questions
Seating arrangements
Dependent
Conformity of the majority to the minority opinion
Subject
75 volunteering men
24 selected individuals based on psychological stability and health, against criminal backgrounds, psychological impairments or medical problems.
Predominantly white, middle-class
Recruited through an ad offering $15 per day for male students
Results
One-third of all the estimates were incorrect (conformed to the majority)
The control group (individual answers) had little to no errors.
There were extreme individual differences, with some subjects remaining independent without exception and some who were conforming the majority of the time.
One-fourth was completely independent; One-third conforming
Sixty-eight percent was correct in spite of the immense pressure of the majority
Aim/Hypothesis
Is it possible that a majority is influenced by a consistent minority?
Individuals are suggestible and subject opinions will be modified and distorted through open opposition
What social and personal conditions induce individuals to resist or yield to the majority?
Aim/Hypothesis
Could it be that the Milgram Experiment was incorrect and that participants were picking up on the fake shocks?
With real victims, individuals would stop the shock faster than in the Milgram Experiment
Sample
13 male and 13 female students enrolled in an introductory psychology class
Three-fourths of the 70 students volunteered.
Aim/Hypothesis
Is it possible that German Nazis really were following orders? Are people that susceptible to authority?
Obedience demonstrated by Nazis is a distinct German character that will not be represented by Americans
Sample
A diverse sample of men in the age range of 20 to 50 from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education
Sample of 40 men
Aim/Hypothesis
How do individuals react to external situations that attack the identity of the individual?
An institution's identity or state is defined by the traits and characteristics of its population. It is the conditions rather than the person that influence individual actions
Aim/Hypothesis
While individuals are influenced by the majority and organizations in power, can a consistent minority influence the majority if the minority is incorrect?
A consistent minority would be successful in influencing the majority to defect and agree with them.
Sample
Liberal arts, law and social science students
46 female students at the University of Paris
No previous experience with psychology
Preferably women due to increased color perception
Should the subject stop, they were given verbal prods ranging from "Please continue," to "You must go on, there is no other choice!"
Should the subject refuse, the session was terminated and the subject was debriefed.
The teacher was given a list of word pairs. They would read the list, then read the first word of each pair and four possible answers. The learner pressed a button to indicate his response. Should it be incorrect, the teacher would administer a shock to the learner (increasing by 15 volts)
Should the teacher fail to administer the shock, the experimenter would give verbal prods: Please continue or Please go on. The experiment requires that you continue. It is absolutely essential that you continue. You have no other choice; you must go on.
A group of eight individuals was instructed to judge a series of simple, clearly structured perceptual relations (match the length of a line to another)
Each member announced his judgements publicly
7 of the 8 individuals were actors
One individual was contradicted by the entire group repeatedly.
The unanimous judgements were incorrect, with a significant error
Sample
Two or one sets of 123 male students from three different universities
Four participants and two actors
Actors would consistently give the incorrect answer, answering green instead of blue.
Obedience to Authority with an Authentic Victim by Charles Sheridan and Richard King 1972
An experiment in order to determine the obedience to authority through the impossible task of teaching puppies through electric shock conditioning.
Procedure
Randomly selected individuals from an introductory psychology class who volunteered.
Subjects were explained that they would measure critical fusion frequency in puppies.
Subjects were educated about experimenter bias and were told that their role was to prevent experimenter bias by delivering the shock to the puppy as it learned to discriminate between flickering and steady lights
The puppy, placed by the subject, was in front of a one-way mirror that permitted only the subject full view of the puppy. The experimenter was in the same room as the subject.
Subjects were told that their mere participation was enough to ensure course credit, and it was not contingent on shocking the puppy.
The subject was to electrify the grids after each error made by the puppy, increasing the shock by 15 volts per error.
Participated in order to fulfill a course requirement.
Obedience to Authority |Milgram Experiment| by Stanley Milgram 1961
An experiment conducted in order to determine the degree of obedience to authority through the administration of electric shocks by the participant.
Procedure
The subject and an actor arrived together. The experimenter told them they'll be participating in a scientific study of memory and learning in order to determine the effect of punishment on a subject's ability to memorize content
Monetary compensation was guaranteed and was not subject to change.
The subject was purposefully given the role of the teacher, while appearing to have obtained it randomly.
The learner was strapped into an electric chair, separated so that they could communicate but not see each other.
The teacher was given a sample electric shock and the experimenter was dressed in a lab coat for more authority
Failure to answer was marked as an incorrect answer and was punished with an electric shock.
An experiment about the behaviors of individuals placed into an artificial prison for a limited period of time
Procedures
Selected the most physically and mentally stable, most mature, and least involved in antisocial behaviors to participate.
Participants were randomly assigned to become a prisoner or guard
Prisoners were arrested at their homes without warning, taken to the local police station, fingerprinted, photographed, blindfolded and driven to Stanford University
All personal possessions were removed and locked away. Prisoners were given clothes, bedding, and were referred to by number.
The simulated prison held three 6 by 9 foot prison cells, each housing 3 prisoners and 3 cots.
Other rooms were across the cells and were used for the prison guards and the warden.
Guards were instructed to do whatever they thought was necessary to maintain law, order, and respect. No physical violence was permitted
The Line Experiment by Solomon Asch in 1951
Procedures
An experiment about conformity to the majority through an obviously incorrect answer to a length perception test
The Stanford Prison Experiment by Philip Zimbardo 1971
Conformity When the Answer is Ambiguous and Minority Influence to the Majority by Serge Moscovici 1969
Procedure
All participants took public color blindness tests (Polack) in order to eliminate all outliers and to establish trust with the critical subject
Showcased 36 slides that were clearly different shades of blue, with variations in luminosity (brightness)
Confederates were either confident or unsure, but consistently contradicted the majority
All participants filled out a questionnaire about the experiment and the other group members. The real objectives were explained.
An experiment about the conformity of the majority to a consistent minority about a slightly ambiguous color-perception test