Module 1: Obedience

Milgrams Experiment (1963) Why do people follow extreme/illegal/unethical orders? Stanley Milgram o Subjects had to teach learner learned list of words and punish the learner every time he make an error o Attached fake learner to shock level escalates from 15V (elevated levels of shock) o 68% did deliver max lethal shocks of 450V (time, personality, culture etc., didnt make a difference Important Lesson (from Milgrams work) Strong tendency of obedience to authority (even if power is limited) Youre not always an accurate judge of how you would behave in situation Unethical many subjects did report that they were happy to have participated Manipulations Inherent prestige assumed Yale had good ethical guidlines o Rundown office in commercial part of town , 2/3 still willing to give 450V Dropped from 65% to 50% o Manipulated environment, authority figure Obedience dropped when grad student left in charge by experimenter o Closeness of teacher to learner, proximity of teacher and authority figure Learner placed in other room, but could be seen by teacher through glass panel Teacher and learner in same room Teacher placed learners hand on the shock electrode to deliver punishment Closer the proximity of teacher & learner, lower the obedience o Oringial experimenter right next to teacher Manipulated experimenter out of room, orders over phone (25% obeyed) Some cheated gave lower intensity shocks Most individuals have the capacity to behave in ways we dont predict Obedience in the Real World Hodling real nurses in hospital to test effects of obedience to authority Doctor called nurse at midnight, on way to hospital give patient psychiatric assessment Asked nurse to admin large dose of fake drug to confederate posing as patient ((violating rules) o Dose = higher than max daily does & med orders never should be taken over phone o Fake medication not on hospitals official list of medications; unfamiliar voice 95% said they would not but in reality 21/22 did obey order

Module 2: Cognitive Dissonance

Attitudes & Behaviors Chosen behavior can affect attitudes? Cognitive Dissonance Festinger & Carlsmith (1957) boring task for an hour; how expectations influence performance o Initially told it would be exiting, but now disappointed

1 of 7

o Told to tell next performer it was exciting experimenter pays either $1 or $20 o After, final task = filling out questionnaire about true opinions Group that was given $1 rated experiment higher than group given $20 and group who didnt have to lie o Subjects changed feelings of dissonance attitudes to match behavior Decided experiment more interesting than they initially thought Cognitive Dissonance: inconsistency between attitudes and behaviors Group given $20 doesnt change attitudes because they did it for the money (no dissonance) o $1 is insufficient justification for behavior in conflict The subjects pair $20 in the study had an easier time telling next subject how fun the experiment was compared to those paid $1 Over justification effects Over justify behavior with outside motivation (money) attitude change less likely o Instrumental conditioning to get roommate to clean her side of room (reward) May stop when reinforcement ceases o Clean dishes as group activity Asks self why am I doing this. change attitude Tina eats out at fast food restaurants regularly & recently joined a health club & decided to cut down on fatty food. She hasnt been able to stop eating there out of habit. Which of the following is true? 1. Tinas behavior, eating healthy, and her attitude, loving fast food, are in conflict and creating cognitive dissonance 2. Tinas dissonance could be reduced if she told herself that she is too busy now to eat healthily and will start over the summer 3. An inconsistency between two attitudes, that she wants to eat healthy but loves fast food, are the cause of dissonance for Tina

Module 3: The Stanford Prison Experiment

Zimbardos Prison (1971) 24 Male participants for psych experiment lasting 2 weeks o No criminal record, took cognitive screens for psychopathology and anti-social behaviors Basement of Stanford University behavior of normal people under situations of authority Prisoners ready for Sunday afternoon and normal civil liberties suspended for experiment Experimenters did best to follow through with the normal procedures of handling prisoners Study was supposed to go on for 2 weeks but only lasted 6 days sadistic behavior of subjects assigned as guards Aftermath Guards never failed to show up for their shift, many stayed late without pay Behaviors that were classified as dehumanizing referred to prisoners by numbers, forced to voer face, made them get up in middle of night to parade naked Some guards tough but far, some beyond roles, few were passive Controversial Results Seemingly normal people can inflict torture and mistreatments of others under extraordinary circumstances

2 of 7

Deindividuation Deindividuation: in group situation, loss of sense of personal responsibility and restraint o Group members not seen as individuals Guards = sunglasses/uniforms = anonymous Zimbardos other experiments subjects wore coats & hoods to be anonymous before asked to deliver electric shocks to confederate of experiment o Subjects with normal clothes & name tags had less length of shocks o Hooded subjects had longer shocks Zimbardo deindividuation can occur naturally in crowded cities o Experiment 2 old cars, left them with hoods up outside Bronx campus of NY university and in smaller town of Palo Alto In NY within 1- min, battery & radiator were stolen After 3 days, 23 incidents of vandalism recorded Palo Alto one person touched the car, and it was to lower hood in the rain

Module 4: Persuasion
Communicator High credibility (experts) Attractiveness o Experts more persuasive, but more persuaded by those similar to you, whats more important? Goethals & Nelson: Lifestyle choice similarity; Objective fact credibility More persuasive speech style straightforward, concise, good eye contact o Norman Miller tape recorded messages rated as more knowledgeable and persuasive when they are played faster The Message Audience initially agrees one sided message Audience initially disagrees two sided message The Audience Central Appeal: Well reasoned, factual, 2-sided arguments (effective for intelligent audience) o Audience actively contributes to making decision of their own o Good message Peripheral appeal: Well presented, easy to understand (effective for unintelligent audiences) o Rely on quick decision making based on easy heuristics (attractiveness) o Good communicator Upper level university students who are on the fence about supporting your position or not 2 sided, well-reasoned and factual message

Module 5: Techniques in Persuasion

Officer Scott - Mount Washington, Kentucky on April 9th, 2004 David Stewart arrested after prank call to local restaurant - He asked for manager on duty, claimed to be police officer, employee suspected of stealing purse - Assistant manager called 18 year old employee while Officer Scott on phone - Followed instructions manager ordered employee to empty pockets, then finally remove all clothing to find stolen item Manager called Fianc to help with search - Requests got bizarre, but continued to comply realized entire call was fake, called police

3 of 7

Foot in the Door: gradual escalation of demands increases obedience Experimental study researches posed as drive-save volunteers asking residents to put Drive Carefully (only 17% agreed) o Researchers first asked the residence to put smaller sign, almost everyone agreed to later put up larger sign Piiner % of Toronto residence who were willing to give charity doubled if first agreed to wear pin for charity the day before Low Ball technique Low Ball Technique: escalation of terms of agreement after someone has already agreed Lialdini psych students to participate in experiment beginning at 7 am (24% showed up) o If they first agreed to participate in the experiment, then told them the time it would be held, 53% showed up Low ball technique involves cognitive dissonance (the foot in the door does not)

4 of 7

TUTORIAL 10 FORMING IMPRESSIONS Attribution: how we assign cause and effect to a particular action or behaviour 1) Based on personality 2) Situation the person is in Fundamental Attribution Error overestimates dispositional causes & underestimates situational causes for others behaviour Cultural differences Probability of making this error depends on society o Individualistic society increased probability o Collectivist society decreased probability Actor/Observer Effect: more aware of situational factors when interpreting own behaviour These errors come because we want to protect self esteem o Belief in a just world phenomenon o Salience of the actor actor captures our attention (miss bump in carpet)

Self-Serving Bias: Dispositional cause for good results: (Im so smart, great skills at taking tests) Situational cause for bad results: teacher hates me, test was too hard Above Average Effect: people believe they perform above average rate Liking others Proximity live/work close with; high marriages (those who work/live together) Functional and physical distance Anticipated interaction higher rating (Rating biographies) Familiarity Mere exposure effect: like those things that are familiar Physical attractiveness more attractive people are rated as being better Grade 5 teachers given attractive or unattractive picture with same description Others opinion of them Womens personality test lowered self esteem like someone more after interaction compare to raised self esteem and no manipulation

5 of 7

TUTORIAL 10 INFLUENCE OF OTHERS People in group alters your behaviour Triplett racing; when in group, individuals perform better o Sometimes when in a group, performance decrease (he didnt know why) Robert performance on task effected by co-actors(those performing with you) and the audience (those watching) o The arousal of situation changes your performance Influence of others depend on preparedness o Well prepared (increased confidence) can feed of energy of audience o Ill-prepared (low confidence) will feel anxiety related to being observed

Conformity Understanding why people conform to rules, follow directions from authority Normative function of a group: pressures of others setting standards o Fashion trends o Fear of rejection/ostracism Comparative function of a group: role of others in providing info ambiguous situation o Everyone on highway slows down for no reason What do they do that I dont know accident ahead o Helps when unclear of own perceptions Bystander Intervention Kitty Genovese When do bystanders intervene? 1. Emergency? Collective ignorance: look to people around us; behave in accordance with others 2. Response required? should I get involved Diffusions of Responsibility: As the number of people around us increase, we are less likely to act These two questions answer must be yes for both in order to actually make response OBEDIENCE Cognitive Dissonance Key principles 1) When individual holds attitudes/ thoughts/ behaviours that are contradictory Idea of how your car should be, what it actually feels like o Because you thought car was comfy, you will change your thought to the car being comfortable 2) Eliminating dissonance Reduce importance of believe Acquire new beliefs Remove conflicting attitude or behaviour (sell car) Components of Persuation Persuasion: what components make argument more effective? o Communicator: individual giving argument

6 of 7

o Police radar guns dont work in the rain (belief prof vs hobo) Someone who is more appealing, will be more persuasive o Lifestyle choices (fashion, what to eat or drink) Initially agrees one sided argument o How pepsi is good, dont compare to coke Initially disagrees two sided argument o Point out how its better than the other side Audience o Central appeal well reasoned , 2 sided arguments, effective for informed audiences o Peripheral appeal well presented, easy to understand messages; effective for uninformed audience

Foot-in-the-door technique: Gradual escalation of demands that leads to increased obedience Called restaurant pretending to be police o Asked individuals to do something small (talk to employees about crime situation ) o Asked them to do bigger and bigger things (empty pockets, then lie face down, then strip search them) If started with last request, would have asked for identification Low Ball Technique: escalation of terms of agreement after someone has already agreed

7 of 7