Introduction to Psychology

S/R Paper for 11-29-06

By

Halford H. Fairchild

 

Film:  The Milgram Experiment

 

Stimulus:  An excerpt of the film from the classic Milgram experiment is shown.

 

Responses:  Today, ethical guidelines do not allow putting people into such miserable, stress-producing situations. 

 

The film illustrates a huge gulf between the laboratory and the real world.  This is the issue of “external validity.”

 

Film:  The Stanford Prison Experiment (to be shown on Dec. 5, 2006)

 

Stimulus:  The classic and controversial study by Philip Zimbardo is shown in a 50 minute film. 

 

Responses:  Today, the study is challenged on its ethical grounds.  It illustrates how a researcher’s biases and values and infect and influence the research enterprise.  Such an effect is inevitable.

 

The simulation was quite effective, and important given contemporary society’s emphasis on the “prison industrial complex.” 

 

In prisons, we find clashing social psychologies:  prisoners and guards; various ethnic group rivalries and conflicts (especially between Latinos and Blacks).  Prisons are a locus of the most pernicious racial discrimination.

 

The roles that guards and prisoners play result in “deindividuation” (a loss of individual identity) – through guard uniforms (including sun glasses) or prisoners’ numbers, etc.

 

Making the prisoners naked, and playing at homosexual roles, was reminiscent of the prisoner abuse in Iraq at Abu Graib prison.  We can only imagine what is going on in the CIA “secret prisons” throughout Europe, or at Guantanamo.

 

Why are bags placed over the prisoner’s heads?  (intensifying one’s vulnerability).  We saw this, too, at Abu Graib.  Why is it necessary to degrade?  And who is degraded?  The prisoner?  Or the guard?  (Or the U.S. by the degrading treatment of Iraqi prisoners?).

 

It is not coincidental that it was a female graduate student who called a halt to the experiment.

 

 

 

Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J.M.  (1959).  Cognitive consequences of forced compliance.  (Hock, pp. 183-190)

Stimulus:  Examined the psychological consequences of attitude-discrepant behavior.

 

Responses:  This is one of the motives for social integration (e.g., school desegregation), the belief that intimate contact would lead to an easing of intergroup antipathies.

 

Attitudes may be dissonant with each other, or with behaviors.

 

War as dissonant with our American ideals.  How is this dissonance reduced (vilify Hussein, WMDs, other rationalizations).

 

Awareness is necessary; yet much discrepant attitude/behaviors are “unconscious,” as in unconscious racism.

 

 

LaPiere, R.T.  (1934).  Attitudes and actions.  (Hock, pp. 287-295)

Stimulus:  This classic study demonstrated that attitudes and actions don’t always go together.  Note this history of social psychology – the beginnings were known as the “study of attitudes” (Bogardus social distance scale in 1925).

 

Responses:  Attitudes and behaviors must be of the same domain (attitudes towards a Chinese gentleman is not the same as a Chinese couple and a White man).  They must be collected from the same person.

 

Asch, S.E.  (1953).  Opinions and social pressure.  (Hock, pp. 295-300).

Stimulus:  The classic line judgment study.  Hard to imagine how people could conform to the impossible.

 

Responses:  One would hardly imagine that people would conform to tongue pierceings, tattoos, or war.

 

Darley, J.M., & Latane, B. (1968).  Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility.  (Hock, pp. 300-308).

Stimulus:  The classic helping study, motivated in part by the 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese.  Gave rise to the idea of bystander phenomenon and diffusion of responsibility.

 

Responses:  Yet, a great number of people helped in Hurricane Katrina, perhaps due in part to conformity processes.

 

Milgram, S. (1963).  Behavioral Study of Obedience.  (Hock, pp. 308-316).

Stimulus:  The classic study of getting individuals to shock a person – mercilessly – in a “learning experiment.”

 

Responses:  Findings were shocking. 26 of 40 S’s, or 65 percent, shocked to the end.