4297111
Description
Mind Map by Sam Naidoo, updated more than 1 year ago
|
|
Created by Sam Naidoo
almost 9 years ago
|
|
General Social
- Obedience
- Agency Theory (Milgram)
- Autonomous
state= freewill
- Agentic State = acting
on behalf of others
- Explains moral strain where
we do something against our
morals for the 'greater good'.
- Autonomous
state= freewill
- Social Identity Theory (Tajfel)
- Three stages...
- Social Categorisation = automatic act of putting self and others into groups
- Social Identification = the process of moving from categorising ones self with the in-group to identifying with the group
- Social Comparison = the individuals self concept becomes wrapped up with the in-group
- Social Comparison = the individuals self concept becomes wrapped up with the in-group
- Social Identification = the process of moving from categorising ones self with the in-group to identifying with the group
- Social Categorisation = automatic act of putting self and others into groups
- Three stages...
- Milgrams Research
- Ordinary Man
- An ordinary man
gave the
instructions
- Only 4 obeyed to the maximum level
- 16/20 broke away
from the instructions
- 16/20 broke away
from the instructions
- Only 4 obeyed to the maximum level
- An ordinary man
gave the
instructions
- Run Down Office Block
- same procedure was used
- obedience didn't drop much
- more natural setting
- took place in the real world
- same procedure was used
- Telephonic Instructions
- same amount of people
- same personnel
- Participants lied about shocks
- Backs up claim that
physical presence affects
obedience
- same amount of people
- Ordinary Man
- Social Impact Theory (Latane)
- individuals function differently in the
presence of others
- gender, age, culture, situation
- individuals function differently in the
presence of others
- Evolution Theory
- idea of natural selection
- avoiding aggression means avoiding getting hurt
- Survival instincts
- idea of natural selection
- Agency Theory (Milgram)
- Prejudice
- Personality factors
- Extraversion
- Leading people to conflict, eg. Hitler
- Leading people to conflict, eg. Hitler
- Agreeableness
- get along with people
- willingness to get on with others
- get along with people
- Neuroticism
- everything has to go right
- negative
- worried
- everything has to go right
- Conscientiousness
- narrow minded
- everything has to be just so
- narrow minded
- Openness to experience
- willing to go out of comfort zone
- willing to listen to others opinions
- willing to go out of comfort zone
- Other factors
- Social Dominance Orientation
- refers to someone who sees society
as hierarchical
- refers to someone who sees society
as hierarchical
- Right Wing Authoritarianism
- refers to someone who has rigid
thinking and likes society to have
rules
- refers to someone who has rigid
thinking and likes society to have
rules
- Social Dominance Orientation
- Extraversion
- Realistic Conflict Theory
- must be competition for a resource
(finite) for it to cause conflict
- must be competition for a resource
(finite) for it to cause conflict
- Personality factors
- Self-Reporting Data
- Questionnaires
- Response bias - pattern responses
- Closed questions - specific answers, no
extending the answer
- Open questions - the
respondent can answer freely
- Quantative - about quantity, eg.numbers
- Qualitative - data about
quality, detailed free answers
- Demand Characteristics - when a participant can guess the
aim of the study and works to 'help' the researcher. Data not
valid
- Mathematical skills
- measures of central tendancy (mean, median, mode)
- bar charts
- measures of 'dispersion' (range
and standard deviation)
- frequency or tally charts and tables
- measures of central tendancy (mean, median, mode)
- Likert Scale
- Response bias - pattern responses
- Questionnaires
- Studies
- Classic Core Study: Sherif et al Robbers Cave 1954/61
- 3 stages
- stage 1 - in group formation
- stage 2 - inter group relations (friction phase)
- stage 3 - inter group relations (intergration phase)
- conlusions
- groups developed group
hierarchies and group norms
- groups had leadership by the end of the
first week
- in-groups formed
- contact between the two groups is not
enough to reduce hostility
- friction was reduced when the
groups needed to work together
- groups developed group
hierarchies and group norms
- stage 1 - in group formation
- 22 participants (all boys
aged 11 years)
- camp was a 200
acre boys scouts of
America camp
- site was isolated and
groups were kept apart
- 3 stages
- Contemporary Study : Burger
- Replicated Milgram's
study but with
safeguards
- - lower voltages, debriefed
seconds after study ended,
reminded participants that
they could withdraw at any
time, the 'experimenter' was
a clinic psychologist.
- - lower voltages, debriefed
seconds after study ended,
reminded participants that
they could withdraw at any
time, the 'experimenter' was
a clinic psychologist.
- Base condition was almost
the same setup as Milgram
- Conclusions
- - very little has changed
- -high rate of obedience
- - no statistical difference between
men and women
- - very little has changed
- Replicated Milgram's
study but with
safeguards
- Classic Core Study: Sherif et al Robbers Cave 1954/61
Media attachments
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.