Psychology
advertisement
Psychology WHAT IS PSYCHOLOGY AND HOW IS IT CONSIDERED A SCIENCE? Introductions! Post it notes 3 things I can do to help you learn What is Psychology? Pop Psychology – theories or concepts that may or may not have basis in psychology Can be oversimplified based on anecdotal evidence and popular beliefs – unsupported claims Scientific psychology- based on documented research evidence In pairs define these terms (relating it to what you know about psychology) Common definition: Psychology is the scientific study of mental processes and behaviour and how these are affected by internal processes and the environment Scientific – systematic and controlled study of human behaviour. Cause and Effect – Causality Mental processes – covert behaviours e.g. attention, memory, emotion, attitudes Behaviours – Overt e.g. Obedience, prejudice, aggression, helping Internal processes – hormones, genes Environment Nature vs. nurture Multidisciplinary science – biology, sociology, Data collection – experiments, brain scanning, observations, interviews, Biological – e.g. neurotransmitters, hormones, genes (e.g. effect of drugs) Social – effects of people, culture and society (e.g. obedience) Cognitive – Study of mental processes (e.g. memory) Psychology – how is it considered a science? Empirical methods – means information gained through direct observation or experiment To collect facts Does not rely on beliefs Important – anyone can make claims Truth - ‘direct testing’ i.e. Observation and experiments Replicability – reported in detail so that other researchers can repeat and verify the work If the outcome is the same, it affirms the original results Objectivity - Objective research is when it is not affected by the expectations of the researcher. i.e. not being influenced by their beliefs or feelings Unbiased Systematic collection of data Controlled conditions Cause and effect Which method of data collection would be seen as the most scientific? Hypothesis testing: Theories are modified through this process Good theory must be able to generate testable expectations If scientists fails to support hypothesis – then theory may require modification A good theory or hypothesis also must be falsifiable, which means that it must be stated in a way that makes it possible to reject it. In other words, we have to be able to prove a theory or hypothesis wrong 5 minute Task! Can human behaviour be measured objectively? In pairs, make a list of potential problems researchers may come up against when conducting research? Interviews Observations Experiments Example methodological issues Reliability It is important that psychology research can easily be repeated and yield the same results each time. Reliability refers to the extent to which the measurement of a particular behaviour is consistent. Validity Refers to the extent to which a research technique actually measures the behaviour it is claimed to measure Back to Social Psychology! The Social approach Year One/AS course covers obedience and prejudice. Social approach: people are studied as social beings Basic assumptions: humans are social, they interact with others and they are affected by others How individuals interact and how they behave in groups Groups in society: We live within a culture and society Our behaviour is affected by experiences within our culture/society What groups are you part of? Brainstorm a list of the groups to which you belong How important are they you your personal identity? Social Identity Social Identity – identifying yourself as a member Social situations affect behaviour too – what do you think this means? Prejudice – examples? Example? Social roles Expectations attached to roles Recap Explain three ways in which being ‘social’ influences people Next lesson: What is obedience? Agency Theory. Homework: define the social approach, drawing on two of its main assumptions (6 marks) Obedience Recap – Social Approach LO: To define, explain and evaluate the agency theory, including agentic state, autonomous state and moral strain What is obedience? In your own words? Obedience obeying direct orders from someone in authority Conformity doing something which is against the individual’s own inclinations. The act of matching attitudes, beliefs and behaviours to group norms. Yielding to group pressure. Compliance going along with what someone says, while not necessarily agreeing with it (e.g. peer relationships) Not an order but a request. Internalisation obeying with agreement What is an authority figure? Who are you more likely to obey, and why? 1. A fireman in uniform approaches you in the street and tells you to cross to the other side of the street immediately 2. You volunteer to contribute ideas to a book, for which you’re being paid, and in your first session the tutor tells you to step on snails and then write about the experience Why Study Obedience? Why do people suspend moral judgements and carry out an order that is inhumane or destructive? “The Nazi extermination of European Jews is the most extreme instance of abhorrent immoral acts carried out by thousands of people in the name of obedience” - Stanley Milgram Evolution of obedience – Milgram Why is obedience important in society? Society is hierarchal in nature Survival function Social order and harmony Without obedience there would be challenges to social order Societal breakdown Nature vs Nurture Innately predisposed to be obedient Authority figures (parents, teachers etc.) nurture us through socialisation Rewards and punishments encourage obedience and discourages dissent Society – encourages us to develop as subordinates (legal system for example) Stanley Milgram Could ‘anyone’ be ordered to harm another person? Conducted research on ‘normal’ healthy participants Investigate whether these ‘normal’ participants would yield to an authority figure and administer electric shocks to an innocent person Milgram concluded that we are capable of complying to the demands of a legitimate authority figure, even if it means causing harm. Milgram believed that this must serve a function – evolutionary or societal Milgram – Study of Obedience https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVlI-_4GZQ Nature Vs Nurture Which side of the debate do you think Milgram was trying to argue? Obedience Theory 1 – Agency Theory Agency Theory (Milgram) – Mechanism to ensure obedience People operate in 2 ways 1. Autonomous – aware of consequences of actions and choose to act 2. Agentic state – persons sees themselves as an agent. Carry out orders but do not feel personally responsible The change from autonomous to agentic state is agentic shift How would you feel if you were taking part in a study and you were asked by one of the researchers to administer an electric shock to someone else in the next room? What if you were told by the researcher that you needed to continue as it was essential to the study? What if the they also said that they would take full responsibility for your actions? Moral Strain – asked to do something they wouldn’t normally do They may believe it is immoral or unjust Results in feelings of discomfort, anxiety and distress They are thinking about dissent however this goes against what they have been socialised to do Agentic state of mind Displaces responsibility onto the authority figure Absolving them of the consequences There are other ways to relieve moral strain i.e. removing yourself from the situation Evaluation - Agency Theory Mai Lai Massacre Lieutenant Calley instructed American soldiers to shoot occupants of Mai Lai “just following orders” They massacred women, men and children – despite no return fire Does this support or refute the agency theory? Why? Supports – involves displacement of responsibility. Hofling (1966) 21 out of 22 followed the doctor’s orders (administer twice the daily dosage of a drug to a patient) Some of the nurses justified their behaviour due to the hierarchy of authority at the hospital – displacement of responsibility Mail Lai – some soldiers refused to shoot Robert Maples – refused an order to fire his gun Even when his commanding officer aimed his gun at him Hofling (1966) 22 out of 23 nurses carried out the order Not 100% Agency theory does not explain Individual differences – obedience is a complex process Dissent can occur for many different reasons (i.e. personality type, gender and situation) Agentic shift – internal mental process Can be inferred but not measured No direct evidence to support the evolutionary basis of obedience However similar hierarchal systems exist in animal groups (primates) Can be inferred that it has evolved to serve a purpose (survival function) Motivation issues aren’t explained by agency theory There are other possible explanations – when another explanation is equally possible, this makes the theory less powerful French and Raven (1959) Five bases of power that motivate and influence behaviour Legitimate power Reward power Referent power Expert power Coercive power Examples ? Agency theory- a claim that provides a description No evidence to suggest that we have evolved to obey those in higher positions Issues and Debates - Obedience Nature vs Nurture Milgram: obedience is “an ingrained behaviour established through the process of socialisation. This behaviour manifests as we are exposed to authority figures under certain environmental conditions conducive to compliance” Homework: Explain Milgram’s agency theory of obedience (4 marks) What is meant by the terms ‘agentic state’ and ‘autonomous state’ (4 marks) Next Lesson: social impact theory of obedience Recap – Agency theory Apply your knowledge of agency theory and explain this behaviour: Prisoner’s human rights were abused at the Abu Ghraib prison under the authority of the American armed forces in the aftermath of the 2003 Iraq war. Soldiers were thrust into the role of prison guards and began to sadistically torment prisoners there and at other detention sites in Afghanistan and Iraq. The soldiers claim that they were following orders and documented what they did. Define agency theory Define the agentic state What is the agentic shift? What is the autonomous state? How does one feel under moral strain? Evaluation points? Supporting evidence? Limitations? Social Impact Theory LO: Explain and evaluate the social impact theory This theory can be applied to obedience but it is not strictly a theory of obedience. Social Impact theory looks at the functioning of individuals in the presence of others How we are affected by our social environment ad the variety of opinions we encounter as social beings Latane (1981) Influenced by the actions of others Persuaded Inhibited Threatened Supported The result of others’ actions – changes to how we feel and act Target – person being impacted on Source – influencer Research task Jigsaw– 3 groups (20-25 mins) Group 1 What is social impact theory Group 2 Linking the theory to Milgram’s work Group 3 Laws of behaviour – mathematical model Presentation – PPT/other programme (5 mins. each group) All members to participate in explaining their work All students to listen and make notes SOCIAL IMPACT THEORY Bibb Latane 1981 we are greatly influenced by the actions of others; we can be persuaded, inhibited, threatened and supported by other people. People’s actions, effect changes to how we feel How we feel effect how we act in response. Social Force - The likelihood that a person will respond to social influence will increase with: •Strength •how important the influencing group of people are to you.(status, authority, age) •Immediacy •how close the group are to you at the time of the influence attempt. (proximity, distance, buffers) •Number •How many people there are in the group.(sources and targets) EXPLAINING OBEDIENCE number SOURCE immediacy TARGET The greater the strength, immediacy and number of the source, the greater the impact on the target. PSYCHOSOCIAL LAW The multiplicative effect Between one and 15 confederates congregated on the street and craned their necks to look up at the sixth floor of the university building Passers-by who also stopped and craned their necks to look up were recorded by Milgram Berkowitz Bickman and Milgram (1969) increasing the number of confederates craning their neck increases the number of passers-by imitating their actions The effect eventually levels off as the number of passers-by grew smaller relative to the size of the confederate group. E. G. One lightbulb will have a dramatic effect in a dark room, a second will improve lighting conditions but as more are added the effect becomes less pronounced. The divisional effect The ability of the speaker to persuade the audience is divided among many members of the audience A lone person is more likely to help someone in need compared to a group of people; there is a diffusion of responsibility similar to a divisional effect Therefore an authority figure would have a diminished capacity to influence someone if that someone had an ally or group of allies. (Milgram’s variation- two peers rebel condition) EVALUATION - Summary Individuals are passive receivers of other’s behaviours Mainly ignores individual differences Predicting behaviour in unusual circumstances is useful Application of principles can be observed in everyday behaviour Cannot predict what will happen if two equal groups impact on one another (who is the source/target in football matches?) Target and source interactions cannot be explained Evaluation in more detail – Weaknesses Potential weaknesses? Views individuals as passive receivers of others’ behaviour Disregards active nature of social interaction Static theory – rather than dynamic Ignores interaction between source and target What does that target bring to the situation? Oversimplifies the nature of social interaction – ignores individual differences Some people may be more resistant to social impact others may be more passive The impact of others involves many factors such as power of persuasion, immediacy, size of group etc. It is difficult to see that all of these factors can be reduced to a formula Evaluation – Weaknesses Can not explain all social situations What about two equal groups? (equal in number, immediacy and strength) Who would be the source/target? As a theory of obedience Looks at social impact in general not just obedience Can explain how the presence of others affects obedience levels but it can’t explain why change of setting can affect obedience What is obedience? Not about the influence of groups on behaviour so only features of obedience that involve groups are addressed. Evaluation – Strengths Useful predictive power Using mathematical formulas predictions can be made to help society in the control of its members As long as the factors can be measured (i=f(S/N) The likely influence on individuals can be estimated Quantifiable (measurable) – principles can be observed Explains what conditions people are more likely to be influences A descriptive theory rather than explanatory (can predict behaviour under certain conditions) Reliability - as it is set out so clearly If same measurements about groups and individuals are put into the formula same predictions will emerge As a theory of obedience Milgram showed when there is peer support there was less obedience This theory acknowledges that impact is affected by the number of people being influenced as by the number influencing Can support this finding from Milgram’s variation The theory acknowledges strength as a feature of groups (power of persuasion as well as authority) this suits the idea that people obey those in authority. Issues and debates Reductionism: the study of something by breaking it down into parts E.g. Milgram – looked at parts of obedience (in variations) He measured these parts i.e. how many volts or how they felt Limiting - findings aren’t likely to represent the whole picture Reducing behaviour to certain actions and situations However reductionism can be useful Scientific study reduces the object of study into parts to enable experiments to be carried out Issues and Debates Useful? How is this theory useful? Latane – social engineering or social control? Could be used to decide who to appoint as a leader (i.e. manager) Number of students in a class or colleagues in an office Crowding Milgram (1963) – Basic study of obedience LO: To describe and evaluate Milgram’s (1963) study of obedience. To explain three of Milgram’s variation studies. Layout (APRC) Aim Procedure Results You will need to know results of the studies – percentages Conclusion Evaluation - Strengths Individual task: What strengths and weaknesses can you come up with? Share with someone sitting next to you – can you add more to your list? Strengths Well controlled procedure – cause and effect Prompts were in a set order Learners response same across participants Made every effort to ensure all participants had the same experience – to avoid bias Obedience due to response of an authority figure – unlikely that other factors could have contributed to the findings Can be replicated and tested for reliability Limitations Ethical issues BPS ethical code – electric document Anxiety and stress – psychological harm Deception Right to withdraw – given but the prompts made it difficult for some participants to leave Consent – not fully informed due to deception Debrief given Lack of internal validity The participants may have continued due to the prestigious setting (trusted everything would be okay) Perhaps they didn’t think the shocks were real so behaved as expected – counter argument? Lab & Control a strength however is it representative of real life behaviour? Could be argued that it lacks mundane realism However! Remember the Hofling study? Variation studies – situational differences Telephonic Instructions Proximity – could this have influenced the level of obedience in the basic study? To test the effects of physical distance between the experimenter and teacher Reduces the risk of the participant feeling bound to the experimenter (obliged to help out with the scientific study) Procedure Provided face to face instructions first of all and then left the room Continued to provide instructions over the phone Results: 22.5% continued to 450v in comparison to 65% in the original study Why do you think results were so different? Participants administered lower shocks (rather than increasing by 15v) and lied to the experimenter The physical presence of the experimenter is a force when it comes to obedience Application – If someone wants obedience they should be present rather than giving orders over from a distance (e.g. over the phone) Run down office block Same procedures as the original study Participants told the research was being conducted by Research Associated of Bridgeport (private company) Dissociated from Yale (integrity, prestigious settings) Building partly furnished Results? 48% in comparison to 65% Less reputable context effected legitimacy of the study During debrief participants questioned the credentials of the company Ordinary man gives orders Power relations- role of authority on obedience No lab coat – experimenter played by an ‘ordinary man’ Draw for three roles: experimenter, teacher and learner (all rigged) Experimenter – noting times from clock and seated at a desk Followed instruction to strap the learner into the electric shock chair Didn’t tell the teacher what levels of shocks to administer Received a phone call to leave the room telling the teacher to continue – to ensure the learner had learned the word pairs perfectly Learner – ‘a good way to conduct the study would be to increase the shock level after each incorrect answer’ – repeated throughout the study Results? 20% obedience level compared to the original 65% 80% broke off before the maximum shock 450v Particular situational factors – encourage dissent Recap Why did Milgram use the same procedure in the variations? Why did he change situational factors? Recap – Q&A Homework: Outline three ethical issues with Milgram’s study (6 marks). Outline two features of Milgram’s (1963) study that might explain why the participants obeyed. (4) Table/diagram comparing Agency Theory and Social Impact theory H/W Evaluate Milgram’s (1963) study of obedience (12 marks) H/W Individual differences – Personality Locus of control Authoritarian Personality Empathy In pairs – Look up these terms Define and discuss how these relate to obedience Locus of control Personality Theory Rotter (1966) Locus of control: sense of control people have over successes or failures and events in their life Locus of control Internal: In control, feels responsible, less influenced by others External: Behaviour beyond their control, due to external factors, more influenced by others Thinking back to Milgram’s findings relate this to locus of control. Obedient people have ___________ locus of control More likely to be influenced by an authority figure More likely to believe they are not responsible Dissenters have an ____________ locus of control More likely to be resistant to authority More likely to take personal responsibility Link between obedience and personality seems plausible and can account for individual differences (example of individual differences?) Research in this area is mix and there is a lack of strong evidence to suggest that those with internal locus of control resist and those with external locus of control obey. Personality The Authoritarian Personality Tendency to be extremely obedient Respect for authority/ hostile to lower rank (subordinates) Adorno: key to understanding extreme obedience and racial prejudice: early childhood experiences Personality formed Personality Adorno (1959) 2000 American students – mainly white middle class Interviewed about political views and childhood experiences Strict parents + harsh punishment = hostile and angry F scale developed (Fascism scale – extreme intolerant views based on right wing politics) Milgram and Elms (1966): Compared F Scale scores on 20 obedient and 20 defiant participants. Fully obedient – scored higher on tests of authoritarian personality compared to dissenters. Personality Empathy High levels of empathy – less likely to harm another person More likely to defy orders from an authority figure We will look at Burger (2009) a bit later on Found that those who score high on empathy more likely to protest Did not find lower levels of obedience Gender Links to developmental psychology Gender Role Schema (Bem, 1981) Sense of masculinity and femininity developed as we are brought up and socialised Affects how we perceive ourselves and others List a few stereotypes Men are often depicted as__________________ Females are often depicted as_______________ Who thinks females would me more obedient than men? This prediction may not be accurate Schema is a cognitive framework that helps organise and interpret information in the world around us Gender Milgram study – 4 female teachers Level of obedience 65% 27.5 broke off at 300v Level of anxiety was a lot higher than males (links to empathy?) Sheridan and King (1972) – live puppy as victim All 13 female participants delivered the max level of shock to the puppy compared to males Kilham and Mann (1974) direct replication of Milgram’s research (Australia) Females less obedient (16%) than males (40%) Male teachers were paired with male learners Female teachers paired with female learners Joined together in alliance against the demands of the male experimenter? Very little evidence to show gender differences in obedience despite traditional beliefs Blass (1991) Meta-analysis Overall set of results (similar in procedure) 9 studies Only 1 found gender differences (Kilham and Mann) Therefore conclude: there are no gender differences in obedience Factors affecting obedience – Situational Factors and Cultural Factors Situational Factors 1. Momentum of compliance – gradual commitment 2. Proximity 3. Status of authority 1. Momentum of compliance – gradual commitment Binding relationship that escalated Examples? Trivial requests- request increases (duty bound to continue) Slow 15 volt increments 2. Proximity Distance – buffer to obedience (telephonic condition) Learner and teacher in the same room – obedience dropped Generator – physical buffer (more inclined to use machinery rather than doing something first hand) 3. Status of authority Legitimate authority figure Yale rather than run down office or when conducted by ordinary man 4. Personal responsibility Variation study – participants had to sign a contract stating they were acting of their own free will and Yale would not be made responsible. Obedience fell to 40% Relate to Agency theory Culture Could different cultures have different levels of obedience? Nature vs Nurture debate – why are looking at culture? Agency theory – nature or nurture? Nature to obey However situation led to obedience (nurture) Milgram – human nature to obey and the situation affects the level of obedience Two main types of cultures Individualistic Collectivist Complete the worksheet Which culture would be predicted to be more obedient? Assumption: Collectivist cultures will be more obedient because such traits are beneficial to that kind of culture Culture – Blass (1999) review of obedience research Researcher Country % of obedience Milgram (1962) US 65% Edwards et al. (1969) South Africa 87.5% Bock (1972) US 40% Kilham and Mann (1974) Australia 28% Shanab and Yahya (1977) Jordan 73% Miranda et al. (1981) Spain 50% Schurz (1985) Austria 80% Ancona and Pareyson Italy (1968) 85% Burley and McGuiness (1977) 50% UK Which of these countries are collectivist/individualist? www.geert-Hofstede.com/unitedkingdom.html Is this cultural variation or could the difference be explained by something else? Think about replication….. Examples: Ancona and Pareyson (1968) Italy – 85% Max shock was 330 volts Less dangerous than 450 volts Students used – Milgram avoided students due to their compliant and competitive nature Shurz (1985) Austria – 80% Bursts of ultrasound not shocks Told that it would be painful Blass (2012) concluded there were similarities found despite differences in procedure/situation/participants Powerful tendency to obey authority May be ‘one of the universals of social behaviour’ (Blass 2012, pg. 203) Due to the differences however – studies that are examining different cultures should have the same procedures, similar participants in order to conclude that differences in obedience are down to culture and not differences in the studies. Recap To what extent can individual differences explain variation in levels of obedience? Tips – review all available information Come to reasoned conclusion that directly answers the questions Question: To what extent can individual differences explain variation in levels of obedience? Review knowledge concerning obedience and individual differences (research and theories) Come to a reasoned conclusion that directly answers the question – based on the research not opinion
