Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Dicuss the factors that affect conformity and obedience to authority pdf
Effect of obedience to authority
How social norms affect human behaviour essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Complete the Understanding Concept Questions for Chapter 5: Social Thinking, Influence, and Intergroup Relations, add your Personal Response and submit them. As always it is expected that your answers will show good critical thinking and be in your own words. Providing examples is an excellent way of illustrating your thinking about each concept.
If you find the need to quote the textbook, you must use "quotation marks" or your work will be considered plagiarized.
The questions are: PSY203 Chapter Five Understanding Concepts
1. Summarize the differences between how people tend to explain their own behavior and how they explain the behavior of other people.
Usually when we explained someone’s behavior we tend to explained in terms of the personality,
…show more content…
Another advantage is related to social affiliation, if we conform to a group we get accepted, which at the end as humans we have a need of affiliation to reached.
Conform does not have to mean give up to our belief in order to be accepted, but to understand that when we conform it is possible to be part of a group and filled our capacity of understanding.
7. Fully describe Milgram’s classic experiment on obedience and his later findings on circumstances that encourage disobedience.
Participants “the teacher” were asked to delivered electric shock to a 50 years old man “the learner” who was tied on the other side of the room. The Idea of the experiment was identifying how people obey to an authority person. However, participants were not aware that the study was about obedience and the other person was not actually being electrocuted.
So, participant should provide several questions to the “the learner” and when this one failed they have to send a shock of electricity, they would increase the volts throughout the experiment from 15 to 450 volts. They participant d disobedience when they saw other disobedient, when the authority
The study was set up as a "blind experiment" to capture if and when a person will stop inflicting pain on another as they are explicitly commanded to continue. The participants of this experiment included two willing individuals: a teacher and a learner. The teacher being the real subject and the learner is merely an actor. Both were told that they would be involved in a study that tests the effects of punishment on learning. The learner was strapped into a chair that resembles a miniature electric chair, and was told he would have to learn a small list of word pairs. For each incorrect answer he would be given electric shocks of increasing intensity ranging from 15 to 450 volts. The experimenter informed the teacher's job was to administer the shocks. The...
In this article “The Pearls of Obedience”, Stanley Milgram asserts that obedience to authority is a common response for many people in today’s society, often diminishing an individuals beliefs or ideals. Stanley Milgram designs an experiment to understand how strong a person’s tendency to obey authority is, even though it is amoral or destructive. Stanley Milgram bases his experiment on three people: a learner, teacher, and experimenter. The experimenter is simply an overseer of the experiment, and is concerned with the outcome of punishing the learner. The teacher, who is the subject of the experiment, is made to believe the electrical shocks are real; he is responsible for obeying the experimenter and punishing the learner for incorrect answers by electrocuting him from an electric shock panel that increases from 15 to 450 volts.
A former Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram, administered an experiment to test the obedience of "ordinary" people as explained in his article, "The Perils of Obedience". An unexpected outcome came from this experiment by watching the teacher administer shocks to the learner for not remembering sets of words. By executing greater shocks for every wrong answer created tremendous stress and a low comfort levels within the "teacher", the one being observed unknowingly, uncomfortable and feel the need to stop. However, with Milgram having the experimenter insisting that they must continue for the experiments purpose, many continued to shock the learner with much higher voltages.The participants were unaware of many objects of the experiment until
If a person of authority ordered you to inflict a 15 to 400 volt electrical shock on another innocent human being, would you follow your direct orders? That is the question that Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, tested in the 1960’s. Most people would answer “no,” to imposing pain on innocent human beings, but Milgram wanted to go further with his study. Writing and Reading across the Curriculum holds a shortened edition of Stanley Milgram’s “The Perils of Obedience,” where he displays an eye-opening experiment that tests the true obedience of people under authority figures.
The real focus of the experiment is the teacher. He will be in charge of a shock generator. The teacher does not know that the learner, supposedly the victim, is actually an actor who receives no shock whatsoever. Again this experiment is to see if the teacher proceeds with the shocks that are ordered to inflict increasing pain on a protesting victim.
It was found that the reasons for obedience are not only psychological but sociological as well. Milgram provides the idea of division of labor. As long as the product comes from an assembly line, there is no one person to blame.
Stanley Milgram's controversial obedience set out to exhibit the degree to which individuals take after the instructions of authority figures. Forty male volunteers between the ages of 20 and 50 were informed that they were associated with a learning test and were coordinated to control electric stuns by flipping a switch when the performing artist in a different room reacted with a wrong answer. Unbeknownst to the members, the performing artist was really not being stunned but rather was going about as however he might have been.
Obedience is when you do something you have been asked or ordered to do by someone in authority. As little kids we are taught to follow the rules of authority, weather it is a positive or negative effect. Stanley Milgram, the author of “The perils of Obedience” writes his experiment about how people follow the direction of an authority figure, and how it could be a threat. On the other hand Diana Baumrind article “Review of Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience,” is about how Milgram’s experiment was inhumane and how it is not valid. While both authors address how people obey an authority figure, Milgram focuses more on how his experiment was successful while Baumrind seems more concerned more with how Milgram’s experiment was flawed and
Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience are the focus of Theodore Dalrymple and Ian Parker. Theodore Dalrymple is a British physician that composed his views of the Milgram experiment with “Just Do What the Pilot Tells You” in the New Statesman in July 1999 (254). He distinguishes between blind obedience and blind disobedience stating that an extreme of either is not good, and that a healthy balance between the two is needed. On the other hand, Ian Parker is a British writer who wrote “Obedience” for an issue of Granta in the fall of 2000. He discusses the location of the experiment as a major factor and how the experiment progresses to prevent more outcomes. Dalrymple uses real-life events to convey his argument while Parker exemplifies logic from professors to state his point.
In 1961, Stanley Milgram, a Yale University Psychologist conducted a variety of social psychology experiments on obedience to authority figures. His experiments involved three individuals, one of them was a volunteer who played the role of the teacher, one was an actor who played the role of the student, and one was the experimenter who played the role of the authority. The teacher was instructed by the authority to administrate shocks to the student (who claimed to have a heart condition) whenever they answered a question incorrectly. The voltage of the shock would go up after every wrong answer. The experimenter would then instruct the teacher to administrate higher voltages even though pain was being imposed. The teacher would then have to make a choice between his morals and values or the choice of the authority figure. The point of the experiment was to try to comprehend just how far an individual would continue when being ordered by an individual in a trench coat to electrically shock another human being for getting questions incorrect. The experiment consisted of administrating pain to different people and proved that ordinary people will obey people with authority. Some of the various reasons are that the experimenter was wearing a trench coat, fear of the consequences for not cooperating, the experiments were conducted in Yale University a place of prestige, and the authority f...
Summary of the Experiment In Stanley Milgram’s ‘The Perils of Obedience’, Milgram conducted experiments with the objective of knowing “how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist" (Milgram 317). In the experiments, two participants would go into a warehouse where the experiments were being conducted and inside the warehouse, the subjects would be marked as either a teacher or a learner. A learner would be hooked up to a kind of electric chair and would be expected to do as he is being told by the teacher and do it right because whenever the learner said the wrong word, the intensity of the electric shocks increased. Similar procedure was undertaken on the teacher and the results of the experiments showed conclusively that a large number of people would go against their personal conscience in obedience to authority (Milgram 848).... ...
At first approach, Milgram’s experiment process seemed leveled, until I realized that the voltage was increased as well as the affliction of pain. Now I say leveled because one would perceive the test to measure the participants’ memory and sensory skills. I.E. (I touched a hot stove and rapidly withdrew my hand, thus now I know to approach all stoves with caution for that reason.) Milgram’s experiment (My response was incorrect and I was shocked, thus next time I will think harder and answer strongly to avoid begin shocked again). The more I observed the experiment I realized the learner was not Milgram’s focus. At some points of the session, the learner would become unresponsive and the teacher was still instructed to apply the next voltage, this experiment was unethical long before this
Conformity is when one would yield their own opinions or actions to appeal to those surrounding them. Sometimes people may conform to match their environment without being aware of their actions. Humans feel pressured in society to change their beliefs to fit in and not be the oddball one out. This is seen in many different environments. For example, in schools if multiple people agree with something, others would start to change their answers to match the group because they do not want to feel rejected. When being the only participant in the experiment, one would feel weird, hesitant, or intimidated to disagree with the group; however, if one were to have another participant alongside them, they would feel a great amount of reassurance and confidence in themselves to disagree with the agree. The saying “stronger in numbers” is significant and holds to be true to many conformity experiments.
If the subjects had known they were being studied on the orders to shock the learner, then they would have subconsciously reacted differently. In one article “The Role of Deception” published by the Wall Street Journal, it states “Often researchers use deception when they want to study behavior that people can't or won't honestly engage in if they know why they are being studied such as to learn whether they use illegal drugs.” By using deception in this way does not hurt anyone, and researchers only use deception when absolutely necessary. If a subject knows they are being watched or know what the researchers are watching for their reactions would not be genuine and therefore compromise the experiment. This is the reason why deception is a crucial part of experiments that studies that are based on
harm. For every wrong answer given the “learner” was given an electric shock, if the “teacher”