Karteikarten
Psychology
Karten in diesem Stapel (100)
- 1What is the aim of Milgram?To test the hypothesis that obeying orders to kill another human was specific to extreme obedience and that it wouldn't happen again - specifically, U.S. citizens in the 1960s to administer electric shock to others.
- 2What method was used?Lab experiment with minor questionnaire, interview, and observation.
- 3What was the IV and DV?IV - there is no IV in this study, but some argue the command to obey is the IV.
DV - called the dependent measure, it's the maximum shock administered before the refusal to go any further. - 4What technique was used to collect the sample?volunteer/self-selecting
- 5How (specifically) was the sample collected?An advertisement was placed in a newspaper for a study on "learning and memory" and that starting pay would be $4.50 and would be paid regardless of outcome. New Haven, CT (Yale)
- 6Describe the participants.Participants - 40 males, aged 20-50, wide range of occupations including postal clerks, high school teachers, salesmen, engineers, and laborers; wide range of educational levels including not finished elementary school to doctorate.
- 7What were some advantages of the sample?1. Target population wider and larger than, say, student sample of Yale.
2. Potentially wide range of respondents: age, occupation, etc.
3. Wording of advert can attract particular features or characteristics. - 8What were some disadvantages of the sample?1. May not be representative of wider population.
2. Targets only those reading that particular newspaper.
3. Those replying, volunteers, may possess particular characteristics.
4. The sample will not include those who will not reply to a newspaper advertisement.
5. May not get enough participants: Milgram also used 'direct solicitation'. - 9Describe the apparatus.1. Shock generator which included switches increasing in 15v steps.
2. Switches labeled: 15v (slight shock), 75v (moderate), 135v (strong), 195v (very strong), 255v (intense), 315v (extreme intensity shock), 375v (danger: severe shock), 450v (XXX)
3. Cables were attached to the learner who was strapped in to the chair. - 10Describe the procedure.1. There was a general intro by the experimenter about punishment and learning to both the participant and the stooge.
2. They would "select" which one was teacher and which one was learner.
3. Both were taken into the next room, the learner was strapped down, wire connected to the wrist, and an initial 45v shock was given.
4. The teacher read out word pairs and the learner responded by pressing a button so it was displayed on a screen in the teaching room.
5. If learner was right, they'd move to the next pair, but if learner got it wrong (was done deliberately) the teacher would shock the learner.
6. The learning progressed by 15v increments and this would continue unless teacher needed a 'prod.'
7. Study progressed until either prods were done and teacher refused or they reached the volt max.
8. Teacher/participant was given an interview and a debriefing of the true AIM of the study (ethical). - 11List the prods in order.Prod 1: Please continue. or Please go on.
Prod 2: The experimenter requires that you continue.
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue.
Prod 4: You have no other choice, you must go on. - 12What quantitative data was collected?Quantitative data - the breakoff points of when the participants or experimenter stopped the study.
- 13What qualitative data was collected?1. Qualitative data - while there isn't a true recording of qualitative data, Milgram does mention the physical state of many of the participants in completing the shocking task.
2. Including: sweating, trembling, stuttering, biting lips, groan, dig their fingers into themselves, seizures, and 14 of 40 showed fits of nervous laughter and smiling. - 14List the 6 findings.1. All participants gave shocks up to and including 300v.
2. 5 of 40 withdrew at 300v.
3. 4 of 40 withdrew at 315v.
4. 2 of 40 withdrew at 330v.
5. 1 of 40 withdrew at 345v, 1 of 40 withdrew at 360v, and 1 of 40 withdrew at 375v.
6. 26 participants went to the full 450v. - 15What did Milgram conclude?1. Milgram concluded that people will follow orders:
a. even when this means they hurt another person.
b. even when they won't be punished.
c. even though this causes them distress. - 16Why did people obey authority?1. It was done at Yale, a prestigious university.
2. Experiment has a worthy purpose - learning and memory.
3. Participant has volunteered - so more likely to obey as feel obliged.
4. Participant is paid - even though told they can keep it may oblige them to continue.
5. Teacher-learner appears random - so both had equal chance/participant believes they could have been learner.
6. Participants told 'painful but not dangerous' - so believe they are not causing harm.
7. The 'prods' - feel unable to stop.
8. The authority figure (man in grey coat) - so feels obliged/didn't want to go against order. - 17What ethical guidelines were broken?1. Competence: Milgram should have stopped the procedure before all 40 participants had completed the experiment.
2. Protection from psychological harm: participants were distressed/felt guilty.
3. Protection from physical harm: some participants harmed e.g. seizures/biting lips - 18What ethical guidelines were not broken?1. Competence: being sufficiently experienced/qualified to take appropriate steps to ensure participants' health.
2. Confidentiality: no participant was named.
3. Protection from psychological harm: participants met learner so knew he was unharmed/followed up - 19How do the findings support the situational explanation for behavior?Participants'/peoples' behaviour is explained due to the environment the person is in and how this is effecting them.
- 20What are some advantages?1. Studies are often realistic so have good ecological validity.
2. If participants know they are in the study it will be ethical.
3. Useful applications as we can alter situations.
4. If study is done in a lab has good control so more reliable and/or valid.
5. Lack of demand characteristics/social desirability if the situation is realistic.
6. Offers an explanation of behaviour/theory about human behavior. - 21Reasons for ethnocentric bias.IS: Specific attempt to investigate 'Germans are different' hypothesis so needed to use typical Americans.
IS: No specific data on ethnic groups which is a problem - precisely because trying to investigate racially-based hypothesis
IS: Specially as all from local area - 22What makes the ecological validity low?All features of the study are unrealistic although the participant does believe in the situation, e.g. giving shocks as a punishment, learning word pairs, being prodded by an experimenter, etc.
- 23What was the aim of Bocchiaro?To study the people who disobey and who blow the whistle. To understand the personal and situational factors involved in disobedience.
- 24Research methodScenario study (laboratory study NOT experiment)
- 25Sampling techniqueSelf-selecting from posters in University. Paid €7 or course credit
- 26Main study sample149 undergraduate students (96 women, 53 men)
- 27Why were 11 participants were removed from the initial sample of 160?They were suspicious about the nature of the study.
- 28What were participants told about proposed study?The effects of sensory deprivation on brain function.
- 29What was the unethical request made by the researcher?The students had to write a statement recommending the sensory deprivation research to their friends.
- 30Obedience is operationalized asWriting the recommendation statement including two adjectives e.g. "exciting", "superb"
- 31Disobedience is operationalized asNot writing the statement
- 32Whistleblowing is operationalized asCompleting Research Committee forms and putting them in mailbox.
- 33Personality test measuring 6 personality factorsHEXACO PI-R
- 34Obedience rate (Actual study)76.5%
- 35Disobedience rate14.1%
- 36Whistleblowing rate9.4%
- 37How many students in the comparison group?138
- 38What questions were comparison group asked after the actual study was described to them"What would you do?" and "What would the average student at your university do?"
- 39How did personality affect behaviour?There was no influence on behavior.
- 40What factor was significantly linked with whistleblowing?Faith (a confident belief in a transcendent reality).
- 41What were the results from comparison group?Only 3.6% indicated they would obey the experimenter. Most believed they would be either disobedient (31.9%) or whistleblowers (64.5%).
- 42ConclusionPeople tend to obey authority figures, even if the authority is unjust.
- 43Strengths1) Lab = highly standardised = establishes cause and effect so it's easy to compare replica studies
2) Because the participants were paid = large sample = representable = generalisable
3) All participants given the right to withdraw
4) All confidential = when whistleblowing participants were given the choice to be anonymous - 44Disadvantages1) No informed consent until after the participant was debriefed
2) Participants were massively deceived so even after debrief they could have felt ashamed etc.
3) Ethnocentric (lacks population validity)
4) Lab = lacks ecological validity - 45compare these studies in terms of the topic: similarities- both about obedience to orders or instructions to commit acts that go againt the moral codes of the individuals receiving them
- 46compare these studies in terms of the topic: differences- Milgram's study involves direct orders to commit an act of physical violence; based on an attempt to understand the role of destructive obedience during the Holocaust
- Bocchiaro et al were concerned with more everyday situations in which people comply with unethical instructions
- Bocchiaro et al were also interested in whistle blowing as a third option - 47compare these studies in terms of the research method and design: similarities- both described as experimental although there was only one condition
- both carried out in lab and involved a situation where participants were aware that they were taking part in research but were not aware of the nature of the study
- in both studies, the procedure involved the experimenter giving the participant an instruction - 48compare these studies in terms of the research method and design: differences- Milgram's orders were to directly inflict pain on another person and put them in danger
- in the Bocchiaro et al study, participants were ordered merely to write a message - 49compare these studies in terms of the samples: similarities- both employed a volunteer-sampling method involving responses to an advert
- 50compare these studies in terms of the samples: differences- Milgram's advert was placed in a newspaper whereas the advert used by Bocchiaro et al was placed in a student cafeteria
- Milgram used an all male sample whereas Bocchiaro et al used a mixed-sex sample
- Milgram used adults aged 20 to 50 and from a variety of occupations, whereas, Bocchiaro et al studied just undergraduate students with a much younger mean age and a smaller age range - 51What was the aim of Piliavin?To investigate the nature of the situation would affect the helping behaviour of those present
- 52Research MethodField
- 53independent variableType of victim, Race, Effect of model, Size of witnessing group
- 54dependent variableFrequency, speed, race, sex of helper, movement out of critical area, verbal comments
- 55Sample4,500 men and women, New York subway on weekdays between 11-3 between April 15 and June 26 1969
- 56procedurevictim stood near pole in critical area and staggered forward, fell, lay facing ceiling after 70 seconds
If no help by train stopped them model would
help
At the stop, team got off, separated & acted if they did not know one another then repeated 6-8 each day - 57Resultscane victim: 100%
drunken: 81% - 58Qualitativecomments such as 'it's a mans job to help' and 'i'd help but i'm just not strong enough'
- 59Conclusionbystanders conduct cost reward analysis
more likely to help those of the same race
when escape is not possible help is more likely - 60the research method- strengthnatural environment= realistic situation
- 61research method- weaknessdifficult controlling extraneous variables but controls were put in place
- 62qualitative date- strengthcomments ,made about victims were recorded, useful as people were responding to the emergency by justifying why they were not helping
- 63What was the aim of Levine?To determine if a city's tendency to offer non-emergency help to strangers is stable across situations over a wide range of cultures. To research whether substantial variation exists across the cultures studied.
- 64SympatiaSpanish Cultural value of friendliness
- 65Purchasing power parityMeasure of average economic wealth
- 66Population sizeHow many people in the city
- 67Pace of lifeTime to walk 60 seconds
- 68Individualist/Collectivist1-10 rating of how community focused the city is
- 69IV 1Dropped pen
- 70Iv2Hurt leg
- 71IV3Blind person at crossing
- 72Research methodField experiment
- 73Sample23 Countries
- 74Most helpful cityRio de Janeiro 93%
- 75Least helpful cityMalaysia
- 76research method-strengthfield experiment, natural environment thus realistic situations
- 77research method- weaknessfield experiment, thus difficult to control variables but experimenters were highly trained so as much as possible ps had similar experiences
- 78internal reliability weaknessnot all ps had some experience, factors such as time of day, purpose of journey BUT experimenters were highly trained to make sure they gave all ps as much of a consistent experience as possible
- 79What was the aim of Sperry?To investigate the functions of the right and left hemisphere with specific focus on where language is situated in the brain.
- 80BackgroundLanguage is thought to be situated in left hemisphere but because they two hemispheres communicate via the corpus callosum, early studies had been unable to test what the hemispheres can do independently.
- 81MethodQuasi experiment comparing split brain patients with non-split brain patients on visual and tactile tests
- 82Sample11 split brain patients who had recently undergone surgery to severe the corpus callosum
- 83DesignIndependent measures
- 84Procedure for visual testsParticipant covers one eye and information is presented to either the left or the right visual field for 1/10 of a second and the participant is asked to name what they saw.
- 85Procedure for tactile testsParticipant is presented with visual information to either the left or right visual field for 1/10 of a second. They were then asked to draw the object they were presented with, select it from an array or objects or point to an object with the opposite hand from the hemisphere that received that information.
- 86Findings from visual testsParticipants could name information presented to the right visual field because it went to the left hemisphere of the brain.
However, the could not name information presented to the left visual field because it went to the right hemisphere where there are no language centres. - 87Findings from tactile testsParticipants were unable to name information presented to the left visual field as it went to the right hemisphere. However, they were able to draw it, select a related object or point at the object with their left hand because the left hand is controlled by the right hemisphere.
- 88ConclusionLanguage is situated in the left hemisphere of the brain. There are no language centres on the right hemisphere but the right hemisphere can perform simple calculations and categories objects .
- 89Quasi Experiment strengthEnables investigation of unusual variables that wouldn't be ethical to manipulate in real life
- 90Quasi Experiment weaknessThe researcher doesn't have full control over the IV
- 91A strengths of qualitative data isit gives us insight about why something may have happened
- 92A weakness of qualitative data isit can be hard to make comparisons
- 93Ecological validity is low becausein real life participants can use both eyes so information goes to both hemispheres
- 94What was the aim of Casey?build on previous research to assess whether delay of gratification in childhood predicts adults behaviour when 40 and are there biological structures involved
- 95backgroundTests for delayed gratification at age 4 (Mischel)
- 96research methodquasi experiment
- 97IVhigh delayer or low delayer
- 98DVperformance on go/no-go task
results using fMRI - 99longitudinal or snapshot?longitudinal age 4-40
- 100procedure117 of the 135 who were above/below average
asked to take part in longitudinal study
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Karteikarten am Psychology , erstellt von laurie walker am 06/06/2019.
- Erstellt von
- laurie walker
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung