1 / 131

Review conformity

Review conformity. Answer. Answer. Answer. Key words : Obedience Agentic State Autonomous state Legitimacy of authority Situational variables External explanations Internal explanations Authoritarian personality. Milgram (1963). Obedience. To understand what is meant by obedience

morganq
Télécharger la présentation

Review conformity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Review conformity

  2. Answer

  3. Answer

  4. Answer

  5. Key words: Obedience AgenticState Autonomous state Legitimacy of authority Situational variables External explanations Internal explanations Authoritarian personality Milgram (1963) Obedience To understand what is meant by obedience To be able to describe the different explanations of obedience To evaluate using research, explanations of obedience

  6. Specification Specification

  7. What would you do?Would you obey?Why?

  8. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? A fireman in uniform approaches you in the street and tells you to cross to the other side of the street immediately

  9. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? Notices tell you to keep off the grass

  10. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? You are a soldier, and your commanding officer tells you to run towards the enemy even though they are firing directly at you

  11. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? While on holiday in a country with a very different culture and language from yours, a member of the hotel staff tells you that you must write in a book where you are going every time you leave the hotel

  12. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? 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

  13. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? Someone in year 10 tells you that the Head wants to see you now – if you go, you’ll be late for an exam

  14. What would you do?Would you obey?Why? At work, your boss tells you that if you steal money out of your colleague’s locker, which they always leave open, it will teach them a valuable lesson about taking care of their property

  15. Behavioural Study of Obedience by Stanley Milgram (1963)

  16. Milgram Shockingly good behaviour

  17. Background: Obedience to Authority • Research assistant to Solomon Asch (Conformity) • How far will people go in the name of obedience? • Case study of Eichmann http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x0qnEZ0nWY&safe=active • Explore the Germans are Different Hypothesis. • Individual Vs Situational explanations.

  18. Background: My Lai Massacre http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWchy6ykNnQ&safe=active Vietnam 1970. Troops ordered to round up all inhabitants of the village My Lai and ‘waste them’. Everyone was killed.

  19. “Germans are different” hypothesis • The hypothesis has been used by historians to explain the systematic destruction of the Jews by the Third Reich. • Milgramset out to test whether Germans have a basic character flaw which is a readiness to obey authority without question, no matter what outrageous acts the authority commands.

  20. Aim • Investigate what level of obedience would be shown when subjects were told by an authority figure to administer electric shocks to another person.

  21. The participants • The experimenter • The learner • The teacher

  22. Method: Data: A record of the maximum level of shock the subject administered to a victim. Recordings of the sessions. Photographs. Notes of unusual behaviour. Laboratory experiment? Controlled Observation. Post experiment interviews, tests and attitude measures.

  23. Apparatus Two rooms. One shock generator – 30 switches from 15 – 450v. Descriptions of the intensity (slight, intense, danger). Chair with straps. Tape recorder. Two male confederates.

  24. Milgram’s experimental set-up

  25. The Shock Generator (from 15volts to 450volts)

  26. Sample • Participants were obtained from a newspaper advertisement. • There were 40 males aged20-50 who came from a variety of backgrounds and careers. • They were told they would be paid $4.50

  27. Procedure • Study was conducted at Yale University. • The researchers had to convince the participants of the reality of the situation. They did this by: 1. The participants took part one at a time. 2. A cover story was used to justify the procedure. 3. Slips of paper were drawn from a hat to determine roles. This was fixed so participants were always the teacher. 4. Participants were told that no permanent tissue damage would be caused. “It is about learning. Science does not know much about negative reinforcement on learning. Negative reinforcement is getting punished when you get something wrong. In this case, it will be an electric shock.”

  28. Procedure (2) The task involved the teacher reading a series of word pairs to the learner. The teacher then read the first word of a pair, and then a variety of other words, one of which was originally paired with the first word. The learner had to indicate which of the four words had been paired with the first word. If the learner got the answer wrong the teacher had to administer a small electric shock by flicking a switch. The teacher was told for each further mistake the shocks would increase by 15 volts and to treat no answer as a wrong answer. No shocks given to learner but teacher experienced a small test shock from the equipment beforehand. At 300 volts the learner pounded on the wall.

  29. Procedure (3) DEBRIEF: At the end of the study the teacher was reunited with the learner. Milgram interviewed the subjects. Carried out a test on possible long term effects and ensured the participants left the laboratory in a state of well-being. Standardised tape recordings of feedback were given to the teacher. Any attempt to ask questions to the researcher was met by the following prods. 1. “Please continue” 2. “The experiment requires that you go on” 3. “It is absolutely essential that you continue” 4. “You have no other choice, you must go on”

  30. Would Milgram’s participants obey? • Do you think the American participants would obey the experimenter and deliver electric shocks to another human being? • What % of participants do you think would deliver the full (and fatal) 450volt shock? • Write your percentage estimate and compare with a neighbour. Prior to the research, Milgram interviewed psychology students and asked them whether they would administer a fatal shock. 1.2% of participants said they would.

  31. Milgram’s results Quantitative Qualitative Objective observers noticed that most participants groaned, protested, fidgeted, argued and in some cases, were seized by fits of nervous, agitated giggling. • All subjects administered shocks up to 300 volts. (5 refused to go further) • 62.5% of Milgram’s participants delivered the full (and fatal) 450 volt shock. • - Therefore 15 participants in total were labelled as defiant and 26 obeyed.

  32. Discussion Obedience was much higher than expected. Why? • Prestigious University – Yale. • Subjects believed the learner had volunteered and the allocation was by chance. • Subjects had a social contract – being paid. • Subjects were told that shocks were not harmful. • No past experience to guide behaviour. • A small increment each time, no obvious point to stop. Those who did – did so after 300 volts. Milgram suggests conflict of two competing demands Belief of do not harm Vs Tendency to obey orders. Individual Vs Situational

  33. An explanation for obedience? • Milgram suggested: • “They are somehow engaged in something from which they cannot liberate themselves. They are locked into a structure, and they do not have the skills or inner resources to disengage themselves.” The Goebbels family – Frau Goebbels poisoned all six of her children in the final days of the war. Josef Goebbels shot his wife dead and then shot himself.

  34. Killing in the name of…. Gas ovens at Auschwitz-Birkenau Rwandan genocide Vietcong dead

  35. WHY?

  36. Were the Germans different? • The answer is “No”. • Milgram’s experimental results in 1963 provide evidence that atrocities can happen ANYWHERE. • He argued that there are two reasons why people obey.

  37. Theory of conformism • The theory of conformism is based on Solomon Asch's work, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person • "A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and its hierarchy. The group is the person's behavioural model." • So, the SS troops followed the orders of the officers. • Reichsfuhrer of the SS: Heinrich Himmler.

  38. Agentic State theory Agentic state theory, according to Milgram, • “The essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow." Holocaust Memorial

More Related