psychology what is psychology and how is it considered a science?
TRANSCRIPT
PsychologyWHAT 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)
Reliability Hypotheses
Objectivity Falsifiable
Causality Control
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
Bias
Demand Characteristics
Confoundin
g
variables
Ethics
Mundane Realism
Experimen
ter EffectsReliability Validity
Example methodological issues
ReliabilityIt 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
Prejudice – examples?
Social situations affect behaviour too – what do you think this means?
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
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 andsupported by other people.
People’s actions, effect changes to how we feel
How we feel effect how we act in response.
SOURCE
TARGETCONFO
RMITY
BYSTANDER
OBEDIENCE
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 OBEDIENCEAuthority figures
strength
immediacy
The greater the strength, immediacy and number of the source, the greater the impact on the target.
SOURCE
TARGET
number
Berkowitz Bickman and Milgram (1969)
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
increasing the numberof 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.
PSYCHOSOCIAL LAWThe multiplicative effect
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 needcompared to a group of people; there is a diffusion of responsibility similar to a divisional effectTherefore 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 Quantifiable (measurable) – principles can be observed
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
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
H/W Evaluate Milgram’s (1963) study of obedience (12 marks)
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
External: Behaviour beyond their control, due to external factors, more influenced by others
Internal: In control, feels responsible, less 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
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
Gender
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 (1968)
Italy 85%
Burley and McGuiness (1977)
UK 50%
Which of these countries are collectivist/individualist?
www.geert-Hofstede.com/united-kingdom.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