Operant Conditioning Experiment

Abstract

The purpose of this experiment was to find out how many people truly abide by school zone speed limits, and how people react when a speed van and police vehicle are placed in plain sight in a school zone. This is because it appears that many people do not follow school speed limits on a normal basis until there is something or someone present to witness it. The school zone used did not have a radar speed sign in case it had an influence on the results. The control group was the speed of cars without presence of authority. The speeds of 30 cars were recorded in a school zone without a radar speed sign. Then a police vehicle was positioned so that it was visible and the speeds of 30 cars were recorded. Finally, a speed camera van was

placed in an area that was visible and the speeds of 30 cars were recorded. The days of data collection occurred on three consecutive Tuesdays. The results show that there was a significant difference between the control and the mean speed of cars in each condition (control: 32.03 mph, police car: 26.3 mph, speed van: 29.57).
Introduction
The purpose of this lab is find if there is a significant difference in human nature in the presence of authority. Authority is the capacity to influence others either directly or indirectly (Psychology Dictionary, 2012). This experiment will investigate the difference an authority figure makes on a people’s actions. Human nature is the general psychological traits shared by most or all humans (Maestripieri, 2012). All humans have certain characteristics, but they are altered based on the environment. This ties into the question of whether the presence of authority changes a human actions.
According to Professor Haslam of University of Queenland, “they [people] come to believe--typically under the influence of those in authority--that what they are doing is right.” (Public Library of Science, 2012). Humans mean no harm, but in the presence of authority, humans will bend to follow the orders of their superior. This was tested in the real world during the Holocaust. Adolf Echmann was the man who strategized and carried out the capturing and execution of thousands of innocent people (McLeod, 2007). Any sane person would hate him for such an act, but it may only be human nature. Echmann though that he was only obeying orders, saying ,”The orders were, for me, the highest thing in my life and I had to obey them without question” (McLeod, 2007). He thought he was doing the right thing only because authority figures told him he was. One of the most famous experiments done on the presence of authority was inspired by these Holocaust events (McLeod, 2007). This experiment done by Stanley Milgram, although unethical today, is highly regarded. Milgram took a group of men, put them into pairs, and let them draw to be either the teacher or the learner. The drawing was set up in a way where the teacher was always a participant, and the learner was an accomplice of Milgram’s (Cardwell, 2005). Then Milgram would place the learner in one room and the teacher in another. The rooms were divided by one-way glass so that the teacher could see all the wiring on the learner and any of their reactions (Velasquez, 1998). The teacher would ask question after question. The fake experimenter in the room with the teacher instructed them to shock the learner with increasing intensity whenever they gave a wrong answer. There was no real shock, but the learner (Milgram’s accomplice) would scream in pain as the shocks reached a higher voltage. The teachers (participants) continued on because they were told to by Milgram’s experimenters (Cardwell, 2005). Their minds battled between their morals and what they were told, and eventually succumbed to the authority figure. 30% of these men continued to shock the learners even at 450 volts, which was marked “Danger-Severe Shock” (Cardwell, 2005). This showcases how far humans can be pushed when their superiors simply tell them to. Milgram used 19 experiments, and the obedience ranged from 0 to 90% (Bocchiaro, 2010). Humans are weak against authority. Using this information, the goal is to see if authority figures affect the speed at which someone may drive.
In addition to authority, and other factor plays into this experiment: conditioning.

Psychology has two different kinds of conditioning, operant and classical. In this experiment, operant condition in the focal point. Operant conditioning is the a type of learning in which behavior is strengthened if followed by a reinforcer or diminished if followed by a punisher (Meyers, 2014). There are two kinds of reinforcement and punishment, positive and negative. Positive reinforcement is to add a desirable stimulus when the desired response is given, whereas negative reinforcement is to take away an aversive stimulus when the desired response is made (Meyers, 2014). An example of positive reinforcement is to give dessert to a child that finishes their vegetables. An example of negative reinforcement is the annoying dinging sound cars make until seatbelts are fastened; the annoying sound goes away when the desired behavior (buckling the seatbelt) is performed. Positive punishment is to administer an adverse stimulus, and negative punishment is the withdrawal of a rewarding stimulus when an undesired response is made (Meyers, 2014). An example of positive punishment is receiving a ticket for speeding and a negative punishment is to take away a driving privileges for people with traffic violations or

DUIs.
Some studies have also revealed that people are submissive to authorities on the road. Photo speed enforcement has reduced speeding and also improved driving behavior (SRTS Guide, 2013). Although the data isn’t from the effects of a police car or speed van, but from a speed camera, they are just as efficient in making people obey the speed limit. When people go over the speed limit by 11 mph they are photographed and a citation is issued by mail (SRTS Guide, 2013). Also, a study done in Illinois on the the effectiveness of photo-radar speed enforcement in construction zones revealed that photo radar enforcement was one of the most effective methods (University of Illinois, 2011). Yet another study done by TranSafety Inc. obtained similar results. This one analyzed speed display boards in addition to photo-radar and showed reduction in vehicle speeds (TranSafety, 1998).
It is predicted that if authority figures, here represented by the speed van and police vehicle, are strategically placed in a school zone, then the mean speed of passing vehicles will decrease. The null hypothesis (used for statistical purposes later on) is that if authority figures are present, then the mean speed of passing vehicles will not change. This will be due to the the positive punishment of speeding tickets and being pulled over.
The independent variable is the absence or presence of a police car or speed van. The dependent variable is the speed at which the cars travel in miles per hour.