Reicher and Haslam 2006.

sophieherring123
Mind Map by sophieherring123, updated more than 1 year ago
sophieherring123
Created by sophieherring123 about 5 years ago
43
3

Description

A-Level Psychology (Core Studies ) Mind Map on Reicher and Haslam 2006., created by sophieherring123 on 01/15/2015.

Resource summary

Reicher and Haslam 2006.
1 AIM
1.1 to create an institution "like" a prison in which to investigate the behaviour of groups that are unequal in resources, power and status, and the conditions under which people do or do not assume allocated social roles.
2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
2.1 Do participants accept roles uncritically?
2.1.1 do those given power excerise it with no restraint?
2.1.1.1 do those given no power accept their situation without complaint?
3 METHOD
3.1 Experimental case study
4 ETHICS
4.1 PRIOR TO THE STUDY
4.1.1 Study design was submitted for scruity by the BPS ethics committee and all gave fully informed consent.
4.1.1.1 All participants underwent clinical, medical and background screening and all gave fully informed consent.
4.2 DURING THE STUDY
4.2.1 Clinical psychologists monitored participants throughout the study.
4.2.1.1 there was a paramedic on duty throughout and security guards were present to intervene if needed.
4.2.1.1.1 Also monitored by a five person ethics committee who were able to terminate the study at any time
5 PARTICIPANTS
5.1 recruited by adverts in the national press, were screened as well as adjusted and pro-social.
5.1.1 fully assessed over a weekend, provided medical and character references and during this screening process 332 male applicants were reduced to 27.
5.1.1.1 From this 27, 15 men were chosen to represent diversity in age, class and ethnicity.
5.1.1.1.1 matched on personality variables into five groups of three and one from each group was allocated as a guard and the other two as prisoners- thus there were five guards and ten prisoners.
6 PROCEDURE
6.1 GUARD INITATION
6.1.1 evening prior to the study guards told they had been selected
6.1.1.1 shown prison timetables, informed about their duties, roll calls and their responsibility to "ensure institution runs smoothly"
6.1.1.1.1 asked to draw up rules and punishments- no violence allowed.
6.1.1.1.1.1 had superior accommodation, good quality uniform, superior meals, keys to all doors and punishment cell, assess to the guard station with a surveillance system which could view all cells and resources such as sweets to give as rewards.
6.2 PRISONER INITATION
6.2.1 arrived one at a time
6.2.1.1 three man cells
6.2.1.1.1 hair was shaved on arrival, their uniform was a t-shirt having a three digit number
6.2.1.1.1.1 loose trousers and sandals
6.2.1.1.1.1.1 NO VIOLENCE WAS ALLOWED, a list of rules and prisoners rights on the wall
7 VARIABLES MANIPULATED
7.1 The permeablity of the rules
7.1.1 although the guards were told that they had been selected on various criteria, participants were told the tests were not always reliable thus that prisoners could be promoted to guards on day three.
7.2 Legitimacy of rules
7.2.1 day three prisoners would be told that there was really no difference between prisoners and guards but that it was impractial to reassign roles thus causing the perception that group differences were not legitimate.
7.3 Cognitive alternatives
7.3.1 on the fourth day a new prisoner, chosen because of his background as a Trade Union official was introduced to provide the skills required to organise "collective action"
8 RESULTS
8.1 the guards did not develop group ideniity/coherence, they could not agree norms/priorities and did not internalise the power role.
8.1.1 Until day three, when one prisoner was promoted to guard, individual self interest predominated in prisoners as each prisoner tried to show the qualities that might lead to promotion.
8.1.1.1 After day three, when roles were fixed the prisoners did develop group identity and as a group challenged the guards, this led to a shift in power and a collapse of the prisoner/guard system
8.1.1.1.1 On day six prisoners broke out of cells and the regime of the guards was ended. All decided to continue as a self-governing "commune" but the prisoner who had led the challenges did not co-operate.
8.1.1.1.1.1 By day eight more authoritarian system of inequality was being proposed by some. The study ended on day eight.
9 CONCLUSIONS
9.1 the way in which members of the group behave may be pro or anti-social, and depends on the norms and values of the group social identity.
9.1.1 falling groups create problems for their own members, and for others, because when people cannot create a social system they will accept extreme solutions proposed by others.
9.1.1.1 It is the breakdown of groups, and powerless, that create the condition for tyranny.
9.1.1.1.1 It is possible to design and run powerful social psychological research studies that are also ethical.
Show full summary Hide full summary

Similar

Biological Psychology - Stress
Gurdev Manchanda
History of Psychology
mia.rigby
Psychology A1
Ellie Hughes
Psychology subject map
Jake Pickup
Memory Key words
Sammy :P
Psychology | Unit 4 | Addiction - Explanations
showmestarlight
Bowlby's Theory of Attachment
Jessica Phillips
The Biological Approach to Psychology
Gabby Wood
Chapter 5: Short-term and Working Memory
krupa8711
Cognitive Psychology - Capacity and encoding
Tess W
Psychology and the MCAT
Sarah Egan