Psychology

• Milgram study Background


  holocaust how ordinary people obeyed destructive orders
• Subway study Background


  Kitty Genovese 38 people witnessed murder and didn't call police
• Eyes study background


  original study done in 1997. only had 2 choices to pick from, basic emotions easier questions, more female pairs of eyes
• Doodling study background


  previous belief that doodling was waste of time
• Button study background


  when person evaluates a previously neutral object in negative way
• Bobo study background


  Bandura wanted to disprove catharsis hypothesis- releasing aggression when you see violence
• Dream study background


  previous study done in 1955 about REM and dreaming
• destructive obedience (milgram)


  ordered to do something that causes harm or distress to another person
• dispositional vs situational hypothesis (milgram)

  dispositional: holocaust happened because of german culture or personality

  situational: social process of situation holocaust could have happened anywhere
• aim of milgram study

  to investigate how obedient people would react to orders from person of authority that would result in pain and harm to someone. and to prove situational hypothesis
• participant of milgram study

  40 men, age 20-50, volunteer sample from newspaper ad, range of different jobs, all from connecticut, payed $4.50
• where did milgram study take place

  Yale
• research method for milgram study

  pre experiment/quazi only had one condition
• data collected in milgram study

  quantitative: how high participants shocked up to

  qualitative:description of their behavior
• what did stooge tell participants about in milgram study

  his heart condition
• procedure of milgram study


  participant watches "learner" get strapped in teacher is given 45V to "prove" it works. teacher reads word pairs outloud to learner if answered wrong learner is given a shock which increases by 15V each time (15V-450V). experimenter gave prods for teacher to continue, 345V learner went quiet.
• results of milgram study

  all subjects shocked to to 300V, 65% shocked to 450V. nervous laughter, sweating, fidgeting, stuttering
• conclusions of milgram study

  people will follow immoral orders under pressure from authoritative figure. supports situational hypothesis
• strengths of milgram study

  lots of controls (15V intervals, scripted responses, prods), easy to replicate for reliability
• weakness for milgram study

  low ecological validity and mundane realism, restricted sample no female, hard to generalize
• ethical issues in milgram study

  decepion: about heart condition, purpose of study (shocking and memory),stressed cased to participant, debriefed at end of study
• diffusion of responsibility (subway)


  more people present in emergency less will help
• aim of subway study


  to test idea of diffusion of responsibility in real world setting, and if race and condition affected how many people helped
• participants of subway study

  4550 people, males and females, 45% black 55% white, passengers on NY subway system 11am to 3pm
• research method of subway study

  field experiment using observation
• IV and DV of subway study

  DV: helping behavior

  IV: race,condition of victim, number of passengers, presence of model
• data collected in subway study

  quantitative: how many people helped, how long it took people to help

  qualitative: comments passengers made, description of people who helped, where helpers were seated
• procedure of subway study

  6-8 trials a day 11am- 3pm, 103 total trials, victim collapsed 70 sec into ride, models helped either 70 sec or 150 sec after victim collapsed
• 4 research teams in subway study

  2 females who recorded, 2 males: 1 victim (drunk/ill and black/white) 1 model
• results of subway study


  sick victim was more likely to get helped.sick victim was spontaneously helped 100% of time drunk victim helped 81% of time. race only mattered with drunk victim, did not support diffusion of responsibility, model not needed on majority of trials
• conclusions of subway study

  did not support diffusion of responsibility, men were more likely to help,people help people more of their race, no correlation between group size
• strength of subway study

  high ecological validity, real world application, no demand characteristics, diverse sample
• ethical issues with subway study

  no consent, deception, no debriefing
• Aim of monkey study


  to see if chimps have theory of mind meaning they can think about what other chimps are thinking

  targeted helping behavior
• aim of eyes study

  to see if adults with HFA have reduced theory of mind, to see if non HFA females would do better than males
• participants of eye study

  group 1 - 15 males with HFA, from magazine ad (IO 115)

  group 2 & 3 - 235 non HFA, some adults some college kids

  group 4 - 15 Non HFA also IQ of 115
• research method of eyes study

  quazi experiment/questionnaire

  matched pairs design
• data collected for eyes study

  only quantitative: score of AQ test and eyes test
• procedure of eyes study

  most groups given AQ test. all groups too eyes test in a quiet room could use glossary if needed
• results of eyes study

  HFA group scored lower on eyes test

  HFA group scored higher on AQ test

  females scored slightly higher than males on eyes test

  inverse correlation between AQ and eyes test scores (eyes test score went down AQ test score went up)