The subjects were observed without their knowledge.
The prisoners were arrested in front of their neighbours without having known or agreed to this being a part of the experiment.
The prisoners became physically ill as a result of the experiment.
The experimenters allowed the prisoners to be emotionally and physically abused.
The inferior feelings of the prisoners and superiority feelings of the guards could cause serious adjustment problems once they got back to the real world.
Serious counselling of both parties was not done after the experiment was completed.
Social Implications
Please remember the mirror and the projector. What does the experiment/study tell us about society? (Mirror). What has the experiment/study taught us that can be applied to society? (The projector). All ways remember this as you think of social implications. Every single study has social implications.
We have learnt that the prison community both the authorities and the prisoners internalise the prison. Is this the mirror or the projector? This would explain to us why there are repeat offenders. Prison became the reality for prisoners so that is all they know. What other choice do they have but to become repeat offenders.
What happens when juveniles are placed in the prison system they internalise the prison and become hardened prisoners. If persons in charge of the prison were to come from outside it may prevent prison authority excesses as prison wardens also internalise the prison. Roles can overtake the lives of individuals and come to define them. Roles confusion can occur readily for individuals. It is not that difficult for roles to take over the lives of individuals.
Obedience study :-Milgram
Why do we obey?
Do certain circumstances make us more prone to obey?
Remember why this study was conducted in the first place. The world was horrified by the killing that occurred after World War2, How could ordinary German citizens allow this to happen? Were the Germans more horrible than anyone else? These were questions that the world asked. Armed with this knowledge Milgram sought to come up with an experiment, which would provide the world with answers. He sought to come up with a genial study. One of the major challenges in research is to stay on the ethical path. The researcher does not want to cause undue emotional, physical, cognitive or psychological discomfort for the subject. To do so would be to act unethical. This however is often hard to do, as the best way to conduct research may be to do so unethically. This knowledge can pose a serious problem for the researcher. Milgram may not have intentionally sought to come up with an unethical study, though clearly he did. Ask yourself how could this study be conducted differently? What could Milgram have done to make this study ethical? Ask yourself these questions as you read the case study.
Please remember the shock generator and 15 volt increments that went up to 450. Remember that it said slight shock to danger severe shock. Remember that the subjects were deceived as to the true nature of the experiment-they thought the experiment was looking at the relationship between memory and learning. The subjects in the true experiment were involved in a rigged selection process for the fake experiment. They were given a choice of learner or teacher. It was rigged so that they would always get the teacher role. Just remember this. Also remember that 26 of the subjects went on to the very end. The Magnus Magnusson effect-I want to finish what I started. The subjects/teacher role could not see the learner. Remember these points you could see them in some form in the examination. Typically, questions on these points are asked in section A to test your memory.
Methodology
The experiment was conducted at the Prestigious Yale University. The subjects could believe that since the experiment was conducted at Yale it was for the greater good and so they had to stick it out.
The use of Prods could also have impacted upon the subjects, as they were encouraged/urged to continue.
The Subjects could not see the person they believed they were harming.
They were being paid to participate in the experiment.
They believed that just like them the learners chose to participate in the study.
The presences of persons who they believed were the experimenters (remember the person giving the prods).
The subjects were obtained via direct mailing and advertisement. To engage in direct mailing means you had an interest in the outcome of the experiment to begin with, why else would you respond to the mail. They were therefore more likely to continue the experiment.
Ecological Validity
It is not likely that an individual will be placed in a position where they are just arbitrarily asked to shock someone or to generate pain to another.
The experiment took place under laboratory conditions=artificial.
The shocked generator looked authentic
Persons are asked to obey authority figures and are encouraged by them to carry out their orders.
Persons are normally able to see persons that they are inflicting pain on.
The subjects felt a genuine 45volt shock
Ethics (Draw Long Bench)
The subjects were deceived as to the true nature of the experiment
The subjects were filmed and notes were taken by observers without the knowledge of the subjects and they were viewed through an observation mirror.
The use of a mild mannered and likeable person for the learner caused additional discomfort to the subjects, as they must have wondered to themselves how could they hurt such a likeable person.
Causing a person to believe they were inflicting pain on another person.
In Milgram’s defence a reconciliation was done between the subject and the learner.
The subjects suffered from seizures, laughing fits, nervousness, signs of severe physical and emotional discomfort yet the experiment was not abandoned.
The subjects were not studied prior to the study to see if they had any pathological tendencies or if any of their number suffered from serious physical and emotional deficiencies.
[ All obeyed up to 300volts]
Amazing experiment isn’t it. This was all it took for persons to cause immense harm to each other. Feeling guilty about it after and while committing the acts doesn’t change the reality that you committed the acts. Even so imagine the internal conflict the subjects must have felt. I am causing this person such pain and discomfort yet I can’t stop, what’s wrong with me? Am I really capable of this? Did I really do this? Could I do it again? What kind of monster am I?
Milgram could not possibly have forseen all of these things occurring but as a responsible researcher it is up to him to see to it, that his subjects are not harmed. You are supposed to think of all the potential negative outcomes Milgram failed to do so.
Social Implications
It doesn’t take much to get individuals to commit acts of cruelty
Authority has a very powerful influence upon individual actions.
Prestigious places, people and offices can influence persons to obey despite their better judgement-e.g the military.
The presence of authority figures can severely impact upon individual’s decision-making capabilities.
Distance whether it be physical distance or emotional distance can allow individuals to commit atrocities against others.
Persons will commit atrocities even if they disagree with what they’re doing.
Persons who commit extreme actions are often tortured either during or after committing the actions.
Helping Behaviour Good Samaritanism: - Piliavin and Piliavin
Does fear paralyse us? Could we watch another individual die because we were afraid. Have we become so selfish that we totally forget about anyone but ourselves? Does the inaction of one individual lead to the inaction of another individual? Do we follow each other? Does the laboratory accurately reflect what occurs in real life? Will results stay the same once we move from the laboratory to real life? Do laboratory concepts actually exist?
What this study demonstrated is that even though laboratory concepts may be reliable they may not be valid, as we may have come up with a means of accurately testing for and replicating a particular concept that does not exist in real life. The concept maybe reliable but not valid.
Pluralistic Ignorance: - This occurs when people in a group mislead each other as to the true nature of a situation.
Diffusion of Responsibility: - This occurs when because of the presence of other potential helpers individuals fail to help because they expect somebody else to. These individuals because of the presence of others see themselves as less responsible.
The Critical Area: - This was the area where the incident was staged.
The adjacent area: - This was the area next to the critical area.
Methodology
Some psychologists argue that behaviour is learned through imitation. From the study by Bandura, Ross and Ross on the the imitation of aggression:
likely to provide assistance.
It was a methodological strong point to choose two trains that did not make any stops for about 7 or 8 minutes. This was a strong point because they had enough time to stage the incident and not contend with interruptions.
About six to eight trials were run in one day. After staging the incident they would get off the train and head in the opposite direction. This occurred over a period of two months. This poses a problem, even though there were four different teams the likelihood of persons seeing the same incident or seeing the same incident with the same person exists. They could then assume that it’s some kind of experiment and act accordingly.
The age of the victims coupled with the condition (drunk or cane) that they performed were likely to impact upon their receiving help.
More trials 65 were carried out with the cane condition than the drunk condition 38.
The gender of the victims could have played a role as they were all male.
The ethnicity of the model could also be of significance.
[Note:- The cane victim received spontaneous help(help before the model could act) 62-65 times-the drunk victim 19-38-Read what was said about the potential impact of the conditions-Seeing a young man with a cane we are likely to help because we may think that to carry a cane at this stage of his life must mean that something is wrong with him-in contrast a drunk young man must be a bum]
Persons could have been forced to help because unlike in the real world such as on the street they could pass by, in the carriage they were stuck/faced with the situation and so may have been compelled to act.
[Also note the age, gender, and race of both the victims and the helper (model)]
Ecological Validity
The experiment took place in a real life situation-pro ecological validity (EV)
The experiment was testing for a concept developed in the lab-con EV
In most real life situations individuals have the opportunity to walk away
Both males and females are victims in real life
Ethics
Persons took part in an experiment of which they were not aware-never had the opportunity to reject or accept.
The train company was not made aware that an experiment was taking place on their trains.
Social Implications
Research concepts developed in the lab, may be valid only in the lab and not relevant to real life situations.
Beliefs about physical stature may affect how males and females conceptions about themselves.
Race may make persons more sympathetic or less sympathetic to each other under adverse situations.
Researchers need to test more of their laboratory concepts in the real world.
Real World concepts need to developed instead of relying so heavily on laboratory concepts.
Minimal Group Studies:- Tajfel
Key terms to remember
Ethno-centrism: - Constant belief that in relation to other ethnic groups yours is superior.
IN Group: - The group to which the individual belongs.
OUT Group: - The group to which others belong
Group Categorisation: - Splitting individuals into different groups.
Groups: - Over-estimator and under estimator. (experiment 1)
Choices
Ingroup :- both top and bottom row referred to members of same group as
The boy.
Outgroup choices: - Both top and bottom row referred to members of the different group from the boy.
Intergroup choices: - One row referred to the boy’s own group and one row referred to the other group.
Choice# 1 2 3 4 5
Boy Number1 9 11 12 14 16
Boy Number2 5 9 11 15 19
Remember in experiment 1 each boy was after categorised in a group, given an 18 page booklet with sets of numbers. They were then asked to choose a pair of numbers that would allocate money to two other boys. The numbers represented awards of real money. Please study and understand this table.
Groups Experiment2 : - Prefer Klee or Prefer Kandinsky
Remember the boys were shown 12 paintings by both painters and were randomly assigned to different groups even though they were told assignment was because of painting preference.
Three groups of 16 boys were tested-They were given reward booklets similar to experiment 1.
This time the experimenter looked at which of the variables of maximum joint profit: - where boys could give the largest rewards to members of both groups, largest possible reward to ingroup: - where boys could choose the largest reward for the member of their own group regardless of the reward to the boy from the other group, and maximum difference: - where boys could choose the largest possible difference in reward between members of the different groups (in favour of the ingroup)
Remember the findings maximum joint profit had very little effect, the boys preferred to maximise difference-so they preferred choice number 2 or 3. Remember they wanted to maximise difference but they didn’t want to not get money so they didn’t like choice 1.
Methodology
The subjects in experiment one were all from the same state school in Bristol, this means that they were a homogeneous group.
The age group of the boys could have also been a factor as boys from this age group 14-15 are generally competitive with each other in Western society.
It could have all seemed like a game to the boys and could have contributed to them becoming even more competitive.
The gender of the subjects, boys tend to be very competitive with each other in Western society.
Ecological Validity
The experiment may not have shown prejudice but rather how competitive boys in western society are with each other.
Ingroups and Outgroups do exist for teenagers.
Preference is indeed shown for Ingroups over Outgroups.
Teenagers aren’t the only age group to display prejudice
Males aren’t the only gender to display prejudice
Individuals aren’t going to be just so readily taken up and asked to assign money to others.
The whole exercise could have been taken as a game by the boys.
Games are a realistic part of the existence of teenage boys.
Ethics
The boys were told that they had certain preferences when they did not. This represented deception.
If prejudice was really brought about once the boys started talking again and found out which group the other boys were in they would remain prejudiced against members of the outgroup.
Social Implications
If the results of the study are to be believed then prejudice is really easy to bring about (engender). This means that we have to be careful in situations that could lead to the development of prejudice as well as take steps to minimise prejudice.
Western boys at certain ages are very competitive so it is important for society to foster this competitiveness in useful ways so as not to get these boys in trouble.
Research designs may fail in their attempt to measure the concepts they set out to measure or fail in their attempts to bring about the events they desire.
Physiological Psychology
Murders
Raine, LaCasse and Buchsbaum
A little Biology frightens you all. Hush! I do admit this was the hardest of the case studies. So you know what that means the questions won’t be difficult, so put your hands together, bravo, bravo. Now seriously lets get to work. Are criminals any different than the rest of us? Could any of us at any point in time become a criminal? It’s a scary thought to think but for chance we could be criminals. It is for this reason that persons such as these researchers decided to conduct this study. It is a way of saying to us don’t worry criminals are different than we are. Think about this carefully as you go on.
In todays increasingly modern society imaging techniques are on the rise as a means of differentiating between the brains of ordinary persons and criminals.
There are a few key terms with which you must familiarise yourself for this study.
PET :- Positron Emission Tomography-This is what we often hear referred to as a PET Scan. The PET Scan uses radioactivity to label blood, blood sugars or neurotransmitters.
MRI :- magnetic Resonance Imaging – The MRI uses a combination of powerful magnets and radio pulses to measure changes in oxygen level and hence blood flow to the brain.
MEG :- Magneto Encephalography – This machine uses very sensitive sensors to pick up the faint magnetic fields generated by active nerve networks.
Brain imaging techniques produce visual results which allow us to see colour images of the brain with different areas of the brain shaded to show differing areas of activity.
NGRI-not guilty by reason of insanity
The divisions of the cerebral cortex – frontal, parietal, temporal and occipital lobes.
The subcortical structures- corpus callosum, amygdala, hippocampus, thalamus, putamen, globus pallidus, midbrain, cerebellum.
The results please remember them.
Less activity in the prefrontal areas
More activity in the occipital areas
Less activity in the parietal areas
No difference in the temporal areas
Less activity in the corpus callosum
Amygdala and hippocampus-less activity in the left side and more activity in the right side.
More activity in the right side of the thalamus and no difference in the left side.
Methodology Defences
Handedness of the participants had no effect upon the results
Ethnicity of the participants had no effect upon the results
Tests were done to see if brain damage impacted upon the results.
No difference was found except for the results of the corpus callosum-showed differences in levels of activity.
Special Note
You maybe asked what defences did the researchers use to justify their findings. They are as follows. The findings cannot be taken to show that violence is only caused by biology. They do not show that the NGRI’s are not responsible for their actions. They do not say anything about the causes of the brain differences. They cannot be generalised from NGRI’s to other types of violent offenders. They cannot be generalised to other types of crime.
Read the four further limitations found in the study.
Methodology
41 persons were used only. Despite the claim that the study did not intend to generalise, it is still a scientific studt and as such one cannot help but to seek to generalise from it.
There were only two females present. The results may have been accurate for males but inaccurate for females.
The differences between the NGRI’s and the control group may have been because of the strenuous conditions that the NGRI’s had to face.
The sensitivity of the scan may have been problematic. The scanners may have recorded information that it shouldn’t have.
The regions of the brain showed differences but these might have been as a result of novel learning. The corpus callosum showed differences in levels of activity, but this may have been due to tissue damage.
Ecological Validity
The subjects were not asked to perform tasks that dealt with aggression or violence. Different results may have been observed if they had been asked to perform these tasks.
The differences in measurement may have been occurred because of the trying circumstances the NGRI’s had to undergo. The imaging techniques don’t do a particularly good job of distinguishing what causes a hotspot (areas of colour within the brain)
The subjects were matched with a control group of ordinary persons, brain damage was controlled for and ordinary schizophrenics were matched against schizophrenics murders. The information was ecologically valid for them.
It cannot be denied that the brain is responsible for human action, so logically differences in the brain will result in different behaviours.
The tasks they were asked to perform were very artificial.
Ethics
The tests were payed for by the defence so it was in the interest of the testers to produce results which favoured their employers.
An independent testing centre that was agreed upon by both the defence and prosecution would have solved this problem.
Social Implications
Machinery can show differences in the brain. This technology can be used for all kinds of tests that could be beneficial to human beings.
The nature of these machines makes it possible for discrimination against ordinary persons. Ordinary persons who may have a predisposition towards certain tendencies could be found out and victimised even though they have yet to commit a crime they have the brain pattern of a criminal. This is the dark side of technology.
More research is needed to determine whether or not there are differences between criminals and ordinary persons.
There is room for these tests to be manipulated by either the prosecution or the defence. Which ever team pays for the tests can get the results that they so desire.
Over sensitivity of the machinery needs to be controlled for in the tests in order for their reliability to be increased, and their usefulness enhanced.
More research needs to be done to determine if there are genuine differences between the brains of criminals and ordinary persons.
If the tests are genuinely able to discover differences between criminals and ordinary persons then maybe abnormalities can be controlled for before criminal behaviour is expressed.
Deregowski
Depth Cue- Depth cues are (hints, guides, cues) which provide information about the spatial (positioning relative to each other) relationships among objects (three dimensional) in a picture (two dimensional).
Familiar Size- The cue whereby objects, which are further away in the picture, are drawn smaller than objects of the same size which are closer.
Overlap Cue- The effect of a nearer object obscuring parts of a more distant object.
Perspective- This is given by the convergence of lines depicting edges which are parallel in the real world, but which appear to come together as they move into the distance e.g. a railway track.
A person using a depth cue will extract a completely different meaning from a picture than will a person who is not using such pictures.
Various drawings of an elephant, an antelope, a person, a tree, a road, some hills and a flying bird were shown.
Empirical Test
The tests are empirical because numeric information was collected. How many persons made different responses e.t.c
These tests involved showing pictures and asking questions.
What do you see?
What is the man doing?
Which is nearer the antelope or the elephant?
Methodology
The questions were asked in the subjects, native language. This means the results were not affected by confusion resulting from the use of the interviewers language or from translations. They understood exactly what they were being asked.
There was a potential problem with classification. If questions were answered correctly according to western standards it was automatically assumed that they were three dimensional perceivers. This could have impacted upon the results.
The tests may not have been measuring cultural differences as noted but instead, educational and social levels. Evidence for this is provided by persons of better educational and social levels performing better on the tests. Remember children have better access to western culture and education than do adults. Additionally higher educational and social levels provide persons with access to western culture.
Deregowski reviewed Hudson’s work and put forward some different opinions. This means the results could have been a consequence of interpretation.
The study includes information from different time periods. The results may have been as a result of this time elapse. For e.g. the info collected from Zambian school children-information was presented from both 1960 and 1972. There culture and circumstances may have changed tremendously during the time elapse.
Adults and children were differentiated. Therefore a comparison could have been made to take into account changes in culture. Note Hudson found that children had higher rates of three dimensional perception than did adults. [note-Deregowski found that both adults and children had difficulties making three dimensional perceptions]
Ecological Validity
The Subjects may have been put in artificial categories which were a consequence of the test-three dimensional and two dimensional perceivers.
Persons are not normally required to view pictures under these conditions (circumstances) as existed during the study.
The tests may have been picking up differences in educational and social levels and not culture as was suggested.
Ethics
Deregowski passed judgement on the subjects he was studying, as did Hudson before him. This could have impacted upon how the study was conducted and the results interpreted.
Social Implications
Cultures are the yard stick by which individuals make judgements.
The western perspective dominates the discipline of Psychology. Consequently studies are conducted along the lines of the cultural perspective of the researcher.
Studies must take into account the culture of the participants.
Theories should be put forward which take different cultures into consideration and as such will be relevant across cultures.
In an increasingly multicultural world, various educational systems need to take into account the cultures of the students. For example in countries where the migrant population is significant in number.
Note
Remember Deregowski reviewed Hudson’s work and found differences.
Also remember the tasks they had to perform for the test such as perceiving the trident.
Bashing Bobo
Bandura
The Study looked at the following four points
How aggressive behaviour develops in children
Whether or not aggression is an innate feature of our behaviour
Sought to determine if aggression is learnt and if so how is it learnt.
Rewards and Punishment (Reinforcement and imitation)
Predictions of the Study
Subjects exposed to aggressive models will reproduce aggressive acts resembling those of the models.
The observation of subdued non-aggressive models will have a generalised inhibitory effect on the subject’s subsequent behaviour.
Subjects will imitate the behaviour of a same-sex model to a greater degree than a model of the opposite sex
Boys will be more predisposed than girls towards imitating aggression.
Remember the following
The number of subjects and their ages
The conditions of the study-control group, group exposed to aggressive model and a group exposed to the passive model.
The children exposed to the adult models were further subdivided by gender and by the gender of the model to which they were exposed.
Independent Variables
Adult model
Gender of the child
Gender of the adult model
Aggressive Condition
6 BOYS SAME SEX MODEL
6 BOYS OPPOSITE SEX MODEL
6 GIRLS OPPOSITE SEX MODEL
6 GIRLS SAME SEX MODEL
Remember the pre-test and 5 point rating scale
Physical aggression
Verbal aggression
Aggression towards inaminate objects
Aggressive inhibition.
Read carefully the aggressive acts committed by the children and those of the adults and note the differences.
Methodology
The limited number of subjects used, 6 for each condition
The rating scale used to determine aggression among the children was problematic. How will different people see and agree on the same thing
Despite using two independent observers only 51 of the children were used. The missing 13 may have been uncommonly aggressive and may have changed the results.
Two of the observers knew the children this could have made their judgements subjective
This study may have consisted of uncommonly aggressive children. We may merely be finding out how aggressive children imitate aggression not how aggression is learnt.
The control group despite not having models shows comparable levels aggression despite not having aggressive models. This means these children could have been uncommonly aggressive.
Ecological Validity
If the children were uncommonly aggressive the study may not have measured how aggression is learnt, and it may not have shown if aggression is innate because the children’s environment may have resulted in their uncommon aggressiveness.
The children may merely have imitated adult behaviour instead of actually learning aggressive behaviour.
Children don’t normally have to view aggressive acts without adults present to provide explanations, e.g. parents, adult supervisors interpret television information for the children.
The situation the children found themselves in was rather artifical
In today’s everchanging world unfortunately children are increasingly being forced to interpret information for themselves as they are babysat by televisions.
Boys made more aggressive acts than girls, for evidence of this validity take no further look than our prisons.
Girls showed more verbal aggression than did boys, this would provide evidence for the popular belief that females are more verbal than males.
Ethics
Observing the children through a one way mirror. This was done without permission from their parents.
The children were deliberately upset by the experimenters. Not allowing the children to play with the toys. 9note reason given why was designed to upset the child)
Intimidating the children to stay in a room in stage 3 of the experment-what else did you think that was? The children would have left otherwise.
Social Implications
Boys made more aggressive acts, than did girls. This shows that males more likely to become aggressive than females. It is expected of them in society. Look at the confusion that the female model caused and the references of the children about the behaviours of their fathers.
Girls responded more to verbal aggression than did males, showing that verbal aggression is considered more appropriate for females.
The power of words to influence the mimicking behaviour of children. Children heard “sock him in the nose” and responded by socking him in the nose. This means that violent lyrics in songs, and violent video game and television language can impact children.
Children demonstrated a strong tendency to imitate the behaviour of adults. This means that we need to be more careful in our activities as children as they are likely to model our behaviours.
Children are constantly imbibing our values. Their views as to what constitutes appropriate behaviour for males and females demonstrates this point.
