- Cultural relativism
- It would have been difficult for the confederates to act as if they were seeing the line wrong convincingly enough
- 2/3 of the participants stuck to their original opinion despite being faced by an overwhelming majority expressing a completely different view
- There wasn't a massive moral decision to make, if the decision was more of a moral decision then maybe the participants would have made a different decision
Why do People
Conform?
Normative Social
Influence
Wanting to be liked
Evaluation
Anotações:
Bullying
Garandeau and Cillessen have shown how groups with a low quality of interpersonal friendships may be manipulated by a skillful bully so that the victimisation of another child provides the group with a common goal, creating pressure on all group members to comply
Information
Social Influence
Wanting to be right
Ambiguous
Crisis
Others are experts
Evaluation
Anotações:
The development of social stereotypes
Witternbrink and Henly found that ppts exposed to negative comparison information about African Americans (which they were led to believe was the view of the majority) later reported more negative beliefs about a black target individual
Social Impact Theory
Number
Strength
Immediacy
Obedience to
Authority
Milgram
Evaluation
Deception and lack
of informed consent
Anotações:
Milgram deceived his ppts by telling them that they were involved in a study of the effects of punishment on learning, rather than telling them the true purpose of the experiment.
Right to withdraw
Anotações:
Part of giving informed consent is allowing ppts the right to withdraw at any point during the study. In Milgram's study it was not clear to what extent ppts felt that they had the right to withdraw.
Protection from
psychological
harm
Anotações:
Baumrind said that Milgram's study placed ppts under great emotional strain, causing psychological damage that could not be justified. Milgram defended himself by saying that he did not know that such high levels of distress would be caused. Second, he asked ppts after if they has found the experiment distressing, and interviewed them again a year later. 84% felt glad to have particiapted and 74% felt they had learned something of personal importance
Darley suggested that the experience of adminstering shocks (even though they were not real) may activated a previously dormant aspect of their personality such as they feel more able and more motivated to repeat actions. Lifton reported that physicians in the Nazi death camps started out as ordinary people but became killing machines.
Why do people obey?
Gradual commitment
Agentic shift
Buffers
Justifying obediance
Evaluation
Monocausal
emphasis
Anotações:
Mandel suggests that by focussing solely on obedience as an explanation for atrocities carried out in the Holocaust and other crimes against humanity, Milgram ignored many other more plausible explanations. Goldhagen identifies anti-Semitism as the primary motivation for the actions of those involved, rather than obedience.
Agentic shift
Anotações:
Milgram's ppts experienced no more than half an hour in the lab and were subjected to constant pressure from the experimenter during that time
The consequences
of an obedience alibi
Anotações:
Mandel believes that the use of an 'obedience alibi' to explain the holocaust has a number of negative consequences.
The conclusion that obedience had a key rol in the Holocaust is unjustified given an analysis of the historical record.
The suggestion that the Holocaust perpetrators were 'just obeying orders' is distressing for those who are or were affected by the Holocaust.
Such an explanation effectively exonerates war criminals of their crimes.
Independent
Behaviour
Individual differences
Role of allies
Moral considerations
Non-conformist personality
Social heroism
Individual Differences
and Independent
Behaviour
Some people don't
conform because of
their personality
Locus of control
High internal locus
of control
People believe their
behaviour is caused by
their own decisions.
Within their control
High external
locus of control
People believe their
behaviour is caused
by fate or luck.
Beyond their control
Attributional style
The way people
explain what has
happened to them
Personal
They see
themselves or
the situation as
the cause
Permanent
They see the
situation as either
changeable or not
changeable
Pervasive
They see the
situation as relevant
to all events or just
the current one