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
Milgram’s experiment basically states, “Be that as it may, you’d still probably commit heinous acts under the pressure of authority.” He also, found that obedience was the highest when the person giving the orders was nearby and was perceived as an authority figure, especially if they were from a prestigious institution. This was also true if the victim was depersonalized or placed at a distance such as in another room. Subjects were more likely to comply with orders if they didn’t see anyone else disobeying if there were no role models of defiance.
In "The Perils of Obedience," Stanley Milgram conducted a study that tests the conflict between obedience to authority and one's own conscience. Through the experiments, Milgram discovered that the majority of people would go against their own decisions of right and wrong to appease the requests of an authority figure.
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.
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
The learner is actually an actor who is strapped to a harmless electric chair. He is told several pairs of words, and must remember and repeat these pairings with the make-believe fear of being electrocuted for incorrect answers. The foretold outcome or this experiment was expressed by several people who are familiar with behavioral sciences. They predicted that the majority of subjects would not pass 150 volts, and that a few crazed lunatics would reach the maximum voltage.
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
The learners were a part of Milgram’s study and were taken into a room with electrodes attached to their arms. The teachers were to ask questions to the learners and if they answered incorrectly, they were to receive a 15-450 voltage electrical shock. Although the learners were not actually shocked, the teachers believed they were inflicting real harm on these innocent people.... ... middle of paper ...
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.
reaction to the volts. This was an experiment based on obedience to listen to the guy in the
Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority for example; the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and neglected their conscience reflecting how this can be destructive in experiences of real life. On the contrary, Diana Baumrind pointed out in her article ‘Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience’ that the experiments were not valid hence useless.
The members were told by this Yale researcher to expand the level of force by 15 volts each time the performing artist addressed mistakenly. Five of the 40 of the members declined to proceed after 300 volts when
...g factors such as fear of consequences for not obeying, human nature’s willingness to conform, perceived stature of authority and geographical locations. I also believe that due to most individual’s upbringings they will trust and obey anyone in an authoritative position even at the expense of their own moral judgment. I strongly believe that Stanley Milgram’s experiments were a turning point for the field of social psychology and they remind us that “ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process”. Despite these findings it is important to point out it is human nature to be empathetic, kind and good to our fellow human beings. The shock experiments reveal not blind obedience but rather contradictory ethical inclinations that lie deep inside human beings.
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.
Within history, there has been quite a few phycologists and researchers who have validated their reasoning in the most inhumane and unethical ways. However, Stanley Milgram’s experiment was so shocking to us because he observed a trait we use every day. Milgram’s 1963 studies of obedience experiment were designed to analyze how people would respond to orders that are morally unacceptable. This study has become the model for human behaviors as well as the acceptance of authoritative roles. This essay will outline Milgram’s experiment by describing the process, and analyze the social acceptance to Milgram’s experiment then and present day.
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